04-13-92 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, APRIL 13, 1992
+. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF (1) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH
23, 1992; AND (2) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 27, 1992;
AND (3) CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION OF APRIL 6, 1992
PRESENTATIONS
1. OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT
LISTED ON THE AGENDA
2. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 26-MAY 2, 1992
VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION WEEK IN RICHFIELD
• 3. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING TUESDAY, APRIL 28,
1992 NATIONAL YOUTH SERVICE DAY IN RICHFIELD
4. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 26, 1992 AS
ARBOR DAY AND MAY 1992 AS ARBOR MONTH IN RICHFIELD
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 80
AGENDA APPROVAL
5. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CONSENT-CALENDAR
NOTE: CONSENT CALENDAR CONTAINS SEVERAL SEPARATE ITEMS WHICH ARE
ACTED UPON BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN ONE MOTION. ONCE THE CONSENT
CALENDAR HAS BEEN APPROVED, THE.INDIVIDUAL ITEMS AND RECOMMENDED.
ACTIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN APPROVED. NO FURTHER COUNCIL ACTION IS
NECESSARY. HOWEVER, ANY COUNCIL MEMBER MAY REQUEST THAT AN ITEM
BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND ACTION. ALL ITEMS LISTED ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
• 6A. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT WITH ADVENTURE GOLF
SERVICES FOR SERVICES RELATED TO MINIATURE GOLF AT VETERANS
MEMORIAL PARK OF RICHFIELD FOR THE AMOUNT OF $29,000 C.L. 81
B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
WITHDRAWAL OF $950,000 FROM THE FRANKLIN U.S. GOVERNMENT
• SECURITIES FUND C.L. 82
C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF 1992 LABOR AGREEMENT WITH
RICHFIELD POLICE SUPERVISORY ASSOCIATION C.L. 83
D. CONSIDERATION-OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE IN
EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR POINT OF SALE INVENTORY COMPUTERIZED
CASH REGISTER SYSTEM AND APPURTENANT EQUIPMENT,
HARDWARE/SOFTWARE AND SERVICES FOR THE MUNICIPAL LIQUOR
OPERATIONS FROM TOTAL REGISTER SYSTEMS FOR AN AMOUNT OF
$52,842.00 C.L. 84
E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION GRANTING LAWFUL
GAMBLING LICENSE AND FEE WAIVER FOR THE CHURCH OF ST.
RICHARD'S C.L. 85
PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
PERMIT SALE OF BEER AND WINE COOLERS BY A LOCAL NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATION OR THE CITY AT A CIVIC OR COMMUNITY EVENT AT
AUGSBURG PARK, TAFT PARK AND VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK OF
RICHFIELD
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 86
8. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE FOR SALE OF
• PROPERTY AT 6501 15TH AVENUE TO THE HRA AND AUTHORIZATION TO
ENTER INTO LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE HRA
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 87
9. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
SUBDIVISION WAIVER AT 7701-05 MORGAN AVENUE
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 88
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
10. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING'CURRENT
SWIMMING POOL ORDINANCE (DEFERRED FROM MARCH 23, 1992)
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 89
RESOLUTION
11. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 7858
ESTABLISHING BOUNDARIES OF ELECTION PRECINCTS
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 90
9
ADMINISTRATIVE.REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS
. 12. CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL RECEIPT OF THE UNAUDITED 1991
FINANCIAL REPORT
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 91
AIRPORT BUSINESS
13. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT
CORRESPONDENCE
14. LEGISLATIVE REPORT
COUNCIL CHOICE
15. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS
16. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
ADJOURNMENT
•
0
12,
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No.91
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Council receipt of the unaudited 1991 Financial Report.
Background:
The annual •Financial Report for the period ending December 31, 1991, has
been completed by the Administrative Services Department. The audited
Financial Report is not available at this time, due to the audit provision
which requires Richfield's financial reports to be audited by Deloitte and
Touche subsequent to April 15. As Council Members may be aware, the City
receives a reduced audit fee in turn for approval for the Auditors to delay
their audit work until after April 15. The audit is scheduled to begin
April 20, 1992.
The Richfield City Charter requires the Financial Report to be submitted to
the City Council for fiscal year-end information by April 10 of each year.
This report is submitted to council Members prior to April 10 for review.
The report has also been scheduled for official receipt at the April 13,
1992 City Council meeting.
The attached summary report reflects the performance of the General Fund,
Utility Funds, Golf Course Fund and Liquor Fund.
Recommended Motions:
Receive the unaudited 1991 Financial Report of the City.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. City Charter provides that the Financial Report of the City be
submitted to the City Council by April 10 of each year.
2. Audited 'financial reports for 1991 will not be available for several
weeks.
3. The Administrative Services Department has just completed their
financial reporting for 1991.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could request the staff to make a more detailed
presentation of the unaudited 1991 Financial Report at this time or
at a future Council Study Session. However, a detailed presentation
of the audited report will be presented in the month of June, 1992.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The Financial Report be formally accepted at the April 13, City Council
meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
yms Prosser
nager
JDP/md
Attachment
FINANCIAL REPORT SUMMARY - 1991 2-?
The following is a summary of fund highlights for the General Fund,
• Utility Funds, Golf Course Fund and Municipal Liquor Fund. A thorough
audited report will be presented to the City Council as soon as it
becomes available.
General Fund
Revenues
Expenditures
Net Transfers
Increase (Decrease)
to Fund Balance
12/31 Fund Balance
1991 Actual
$11,703,642
11,938,423
173,542
(61,239)
$ 2,236,477
1991 Budget
$11,736,530
11,962,310
225,780
0
$2,297,716
1990 Actual
$11,748,937
11,753,268
5,794
1,463
$2,297,716
The General Fund of the City has a 1991 year-end Fund Balance of
$2,236,477 as compared to $2,297,716 at year-end 1990. The operating
budget for 1991 was essentially in balance except for the $50,000
equity transfer to the HRA to cover airport expenditures. Thus, in
spite of the mid year cut of $350,000 in LGA, the City was able to
make reductions to balance the cuts. The fund balance is designated
for working capital to meet the subsequent year's expenses until
property taxes are collected from the county in July of the next year.
Water Utility Fund
Revenues
Expenses
• Net Transfers
Net Income
12/31 Retained
Earnings
1991 Actual
$ 1,839,017
1,527,658
(20,000)
291,359
$ 4,265,078
1991 Budget
$ 1,800,950
1,611,070
(20,000)
169,880
$ 3,951,632
1990 Actual
$ 1,768,695
1,592,593
(20,000)
156,102
:? 4,011,752
The Water Utility Fund experienced a stronger year from a financial
perspective in 1991 compared to 1990. Net income for 1991 was
$291,359 compared to $156,102 in 1990. This represents an 87%
increase in net income. The stronger performance in 1991 is
attributed to increased sales and decreased expenses. Water sales
increased 4.3% in 1991 compared to 1990 and operating expenses
decreased 4.1%, primarily due to a decrease in maintenance and repair
expenses.
At year-end 1991 retained earnings in the Water Fund totalled
$4,265,078. The retained earnings and available cash in the Water
Utility Fund are necessary to support capital improvements and
maintenance of the operation. This cushion greatly reduces the
possibility that the city would be required to issue bonds to make
emergency repairs, upgrades or maintenance in the water utility
system. Constant renovations and repairs in the Water Treatment Plant
and the associated City wells are being undertaken by the City to
maintain the high quality of water provided to Richfield citizens. In
addition, in 1991 $38,033 of retained earnings was transferred as a
loan to the Expanded New Home Program.
0
Id-a
Sewer Utility Fund
Revenues
• Expenses
Net Transfers
Net Income (Loss)
12/31 Retained
Earnings
1991 Actual
$ 1,451,557
1,540,899
(15,000)
(104,342)
$ 3,051,260
1991 Budget
$ 1,450,800
1,642,220
(191,420)
$ 2,787,215
1990 Actual
$ 1,410,109
1,495,193
(85,084)
$ 3,193,635
The Sanitary Sewer Fund showed a net income in 1991 of negative
$104,342. This is roughly $19,250 below the net income of 1990 but is
$87,000 better than the 1991 revised budget. The decrease in the net
income is tied directly to the increasing charges of Metropolitan
Waste Control Commission (MWCC). MWCC rates for 1991 were $51,153
greater than 'they were in 1990. Rate increases for 1992 in the
Sanitary Sewer Fund took into consideration the increases faced by the
Fund in payment to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. As with
the Water Fund, $38,033 of the retained earnings was,transferred to
the Expanded New Home Program as a loan.
Storm Sewer Utility Fund
1991 Actual 1991 Budget 1990 Actual
Revenues $ 696,699 $ 683,800 S 671,321
Expenditures 451,053 490,380 449,383
Net Income 245,646 193,420 221,938
12/31 Retained
Earnings $ 871,583 $ 819,357 $ 625,937
The Storm Sewer Utility performed better than expected for 1991. Net
. income for the Fund for 1991 was $245,646, compared to 1990 net income
of $221,938. The net income added to retained earnings will be needed
in 1992 to cover an expected increase in expenses, as rates were not
increased for 1992.
Golf Course Fund
1991 Actual 1991 Budget 1990 Actual
Revenues $ 1,194,662 $ 1,097,700 $ 1,187,224
Expenditures 1,095,980 1,082,480 1,121,435
Net Income 98,682 15,220 65,789
12/31 Retained
Earnings $ 507,214 $ 423,752 $ 408,532
The Golf Course operation had a very strong year in 1991. User fees
increased approximately $25,000 or 2.5% compared to 1990. Expenses
decreased in 1991 approximately $25,500. The decreases were primarily
for the rental of land and for parts, tools, and supplies expense,
offset by an increase in personal services.
0
Liquor Fund
Revenues
. Expenditures
Net Transfers
Net Income (Loss)
12/31 Retained
Earnings
1991 Actual
$ 6,652,388
6,110,719
(428,190)
113,479
$ 2,123,000
1991 Budaet
$ 6,225,000
5,771,110
(428,190)
25,700
$ 2,035,221
la-3
1990 Actual
$ 6,114,019
5,714,186
(423,070)
(23,237)
$ 2,009,521
Year-end revenues for 1991 reached $6,652,388 as compared tc
$6,114,019 the previous year and the record revenues of $6,375,615 in
1988. The 1991 year-end revenue figure was once again the highest of
any municipal liquor operation in the State of Minnesota. Liquor
sales were up in 1991 due in part to the American League Championship
and World Series games held in Minneapolis. For 1991, customer
volumes increased approximately 7,800 customers at Cedar and 3,100
customers at Lyndale. The volume of customers at Penn decreased
approximately 1,800 customers, however higher dollar purchases per
customer resulted in a 10$ overall increase in Penn's sales. Gross
margins in 1991 were consistent with 1990 and operating expenses were
slightly lower. As in prior years, transfers include $300,000
transferred to the Special Revenue Fund for Capital Improvements.
Summary
This financial summary represents the highlights of the overall
financial report for the City of Richfield. Financial reports for all
funds discussed are attached to this letter.
A comprehensive review of the 1991 financial operations will be
presented to the Council once the auditor's report has been completed.
In general, 1991 was a favorable year for the City's financial
operations. Revenue cuts by the State of Minnesota to the City's
General Fund have cut deeply into the City's ability to maintain a
positive year-end position while providing the same services the City
has presented to the public in the past. The City actively responded
in 1991 to reduce expenditures to meet the reductions in state aid.
In addition, the steady increase in charges by the Metropolitan Waste
Control Commission for sewer charges will have to be carefully
monitored in setting sewer rates for 1993 and future years.
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 1991 and 1990
ASSETS
Cash and temporary cash investments
Receivables:
Taxes
Special assessments
Accounts
Due from other funds
Due from other governments
Total Assets
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE
Liabilities:
Accounts payable
Accrued salaries and employee benefits
payable
Due to other funds
Due to other governments
• Deferred revenue
Total Liabilities
Fund Balance:
Reserved for:
Encumbrances
Unreserved:
Designated for working capital
Total Fund Balance
Total Liabilities and Fund Balance
n
1991
$3,711,033
176,574
7,129
87,790
11,678
40.529
$4,034,733
$ 95,509
1,165,907
50,000
333,783
153.057
1,798,256
52,000
2,184,477
2,236,477
$4,034,733
FORM F
1990
$3,345,775
76,037
13,413
89,160
25,420
102.083
$3,651,888
$ 137,979
1,114,266
44,087
57,840
1.354.172
52,749
2,244,967
2,297,716
$3,651,888
-70-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA FORM F-1
GENERAL FUND
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDIT URES, AND CHANGES
IN FUND BALANCE - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
For the Year Ended Decemb er 31, 1991
With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Y ear Ended December 31, 1990
1991
Over
Final (Under) 1990
Budget Actual Budget Actual
Revenues:
Taxes $ 4,557,910 $ 4,552,015 $ (5,895) $ 4,317,458
Licenses and permits 354,000 329,490 (24,510) 303,928
Intergovernmental revenue 5,130,810 5,136,858 6,048 5,397,787
Charges for services 1,185,690 1,190,362 4,672 1,178,259
Fines and forfeits 226,800 189,109 (37,691) 222,552
Miscellaneous revenues 281,320 305,808 24,488 328,953
Total Revenues
Expenditures:
General Government
Administrative Services
Public Safety
Community Development
Community Services
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Other Financing Sources (Uses) -
Operating transfers in (out):
Special Revenue Funds
Enterprise Funds
Internal Service Funds
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Excess of Revenues and Other
Sources Over Expenditures and
Other Uses
Fund Balance - At Beginning of Year
Equity Transfer In
Fund Balance - At End of Year
11,736,530 11,703,642 32 888) 11,748,937
603,690 524,846 (78,844) 667,672
879,340 874,840 (4,500) 839,961
6,008,840 6,145,877 137,037 5,824,302
245,380 203,258 (42,122) 250,009
4,225,060 4,189,602 35 458) 4,258,260
11,962,310 11,938,423 23 887) 11,840,204
(225,780) (234,781) (9,001) (91,267)
(31,550) (31,550) (30,340)
128,190 128,190 123,070
(14,260) (16,500) (2,240)
82,380 80,140 (2,240) 92,730
(143,400) (154,641) (11,241) 1,463
2,297,716 2,297,716 2,296,253
143,400 93,402 49 998)
$ 2,297,716 $ 2,236,477 61 239) $ 2,297,716
-71-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES COMPARED TO BUDGET
• For the Year Ended December 31, 1991
With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 1990
Taxes:
Current ad valorem
Fiscal disparities
Delinquent ad valorem
Penalties, interest, and forfeited
tax sales
Hotel/Motel lodging
Total Taxes
Licenses and Permits:
Business licenses
Nonbusiness licenses and permits
Total Licenses and Permits
Intergovernmental Revenue:
Federal -
Civil defense reimbursement
tate:
Local government aid
Homestead credit
Law officer training
State-aid street maintenance
Crime prevention grant
Natural resources grant
Storm disaster aid
Surcharge rebate
County -
Community health services
1991
Over
Final, (Under) 1990
Budget Actual Budget Actual
$3,552,499 $3,535,496
915,411 915,411
15,000 9,526
$(17,003)
(5,474)
3,579,617
685,130
6,773
5,000 3,087
70,000 88,495
4,557,910 4,552,015
157,000 141,230
197,000 188,260
354,000
8,000
.3,057,360
1,682,150
18,000
242,290
329.490
14,215
3,057,363
1,683,765
16,297
242,296
123,010 122,922
Total Intergovernmental. Revenue 5,130,810 5,136,858
(1,913) 9,229
18,495 36,709
(5,895) 4,317,458
(15,770) 172,550
(8,740) 131,378
24 510) 303,928
6,215 11,783
3
1,615
(1,703)
6
3,413,191
1,570,082
19,780
253,384
5,018
88) 124,549
6,048 5,397,787
-72-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RRM 7-2
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES COMPARED TO BUDGET (CONCLUDED)
• For the Year EndCd December 31, 1991
With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 1990
1991
Over
Final (Under) 1990
Budget Actual Budget Actual
Charges for Services:
General Government $ 34,000 $ 29,630 $ (4,370) $ 26,397
Deputy Registrar 270,000 274,851 4,851 256,692
Public Safety 138,320 146,380 8,060 199,230
Community Development 10,400 9,888 (512) 7,190
Community Services 2,000 5,283 3,283 2,035
Health 2,000 5,356 3,356 5,662
Park and Recreation 128,960 128,700 (260) 119,141
Swimming Pool 187,870 180,284 (7,586) 101,111
Ice Arena 270,010 265,057 (4,953) 260,340
Nature Center 39,100 39,771 671 35,986
Community Center 103,030 105,162 2,132 164,475
Total Charges for Services
Fines and Forfeits:
Municipal court fines
Forfeited bail
• Highway patrol fines
Total Fines and Forfeits
Miscellaneous Revenues:
Interest
Rent
Contributions
Recovery - damage to City property
Other
1,185,690 1,190,362 4,672
220,000 179,815 (40,185)
5,000 6,263 1,263
1,800 3,031 1,231
226,800 189,109 37 691)
259,620 282,546 22,926
15,500 15,664 164
2,044 2,044
4,000 3,094 (906)
2,200 2,460 y
260
Total Miscellaneous Revenues 281,320 305,808 24,488
Total Revenues 11,736,530 $11,703,642
•
$(32,888)
1,178,259
213,677
3,389
5,486
222,552
289,709
24,782
2,400
8,036
4,026
328,953
$11,748,937
-73-
IQ-?
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES COMPARED TO BUDGET
• For the Year Ended December 31, 1991
With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 1990
GENERAL GOVERNMENT:
Mayor-Council:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Total
Other Agencies:
"Share a Home
Senior Outreach Services
Cornerstone Advocacy
Storefront/Youth Action
Senior Inform & Referral
Shared Transportation
South Hennepin Human Services
Total
City Manager:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Total
Airport Project:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Total
Legal:
Other services and charges
Total
Total General Government
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
Administration:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Total
41
1991"
Over
Final (Under) 1990
Budget Actual Budget Actual
$ 33,510 $ 33,762 $ 252 $ 32,373
55,550 47,015 (8,535) 44,104
8,350 7,754 596) 7,579
97,410 88,531 (8,879) 84,056
1,000 1,000 1,000
2,810 2,810 2,415
3,000 3,000 1,300
53,400 53,400 51,350
3,000 2,657 (343)
3,000 3,000 2,915
14,380 6,083 (8,297) 15,500
80,590 71,950 (8,640) 74,480
97,490 106,594 9,104 109,217
49,950 42,139 (7,811) 61,172
5,650 5,387 263) 6,365
153,090 154,120 1,030 176,754
2,030 2,238 208 19,826
17,390 9,305 (8,085) 76,510
820 375 445) 2,969
20,240 11,918 (8,322) 99,305
252,360 198,327 54 033) 233,077
252,360 198,327 54 033) 233,077
603 690
$ 92,040
12,760
4,050
108,850
$524,846
$ 95,578
11,107
4,751
111,436
$(78,844.)
$ 3,538
(1,653)
701
2,586
667 672
$ 90,312
15,364
2,939
108,615
-74-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
1Q_
FORM F-
GENERAL FUND
. SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES COMPARED TO BUDGET (CONTINUED)
For the Year Ended December 31, 1991
With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 1990
1991
Over
Final (Under) 1990
Budget Actual Budget Actual
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES: (Continued)
Finance:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Capital outlay
Total
Tourism Administration:
Other services and charges
Total
Personnel:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Capital outlay
• Total
Youth Employment - Counseling:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Total
City Clerk:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Total
Election:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Capital Outlay
Total
Assessing:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Capital outlay
Total
Total Administrative Services
$145,560 $147,059 $ 1,499 $129,617
30,660 30,943 283 31,796
15,050 11,534 (3,516) 11,070
3,496
191,270 189,536 (1,734) 175,979
70,000 83,829 13,829 34,874
70,000 83,829 13,829 34,874
33,160 32,520 (640) 33,487
27,810 24,159 (3,651) 27,876
11,220 6,796 (4,424) 9,291
918
72,190 63,475 -(8,715) 71,572
26,440 25,890 (550) 27,021
910 762 (148) 799
930 362 568) 822
28,280 27,014 (1,266) 28,642
179,780 175,061 (4,719) 162,999
21,300 21,296 (4) 21,430
9,200 8,292 908) 8,432
210,280 204,649 (5,631) 192,861
8,000 7,785 (215) 25,837
2,400 2,055 (345) 22,350
1,200 845 (355) 5,275
4,380 4,582 202
15,980 15,267 713) 53,462
39,730 39,855 125 37,018
137,470 135,914 (1,556) 131,606
5,290 3,865 (1,425) 4,502
830
182,490 179,634 (2,856) 173,956
879 340 874 840 ILL -50-0) $839,961
-75-
CI TY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF EXPEN DITURES COMPARED TO BUDGET (CONTINUED)
For the Year Ended Decem ber 31, 1991
With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended De cember 31, 1990
1991
Over
Final (Under) 1990
Budget Actual Budget Actual
PUBLIC SAFETY:
Administrative Support Services:
Personal services $ 179,790 $ 181,589 $ 1,799 $ 827,233
Other services and charges 245,660 258,397 12,737 425,585
Supplies 750 1,935 1,185 52,628
Capital outlay 26,264
Total 426,200 441,921 15,721 1,331,710
Police Protection:
Personal services 2,206,390 2,483,812 277,422 2,198,888
Other services and charges 372,970 285,266 (87,704) 281,343
Supplies 45,500 42,511 (2,989) 53,417
Capital outlay 10,000 8,593 (1,407) 5,713
Total 2,634,860 2,820,182 185,322 2,539,361
Fire Protection:
Personal services 1,570,130 1,548,061 (22,069) 1,434,933
Other services and charges 124,930 128,129 3,199 151,469
Supplies 24,040 22,107 (1,933) 34,926
• Capital outlay 12,050 9,250 (2,800) 21,328
Total 1,731,150 1,707,547 23 603) 1,642,656
Police Ancillary Service:
Personal services 681,140 658,554 (22,586)
Other services and charges 197,480 175,269 (22,211)
Supplies 33,300 30,992 (2,308)
Capital outlay 7,200 6,995 205)
Total 919,120 871,810 47 310)
Inspection:
Personal services 220,930 243,690 22,760 186,653
Other services and charges 21,730 16,061 (5,669) 58,544
Supplies 2,550 3,516 966 4,079
Capital outlay 5,000 (5,000) 5,440
Total 250,210 263,267 13,057 254,716
Emergency Services:
Personal services 6,870 6,096 (774) 6,333
Other services and charges 15,730 12,516 (3,214) 10,119
Supplies 7,700 5,348 (2,352) 9,257
Capital outlay 17,000 17,190 190 30,150
Total 47,300 41,150 (6,150) 55,859
Total Public Safety $6,008,840 $6,145,877 $137,037 $5,824,302
-76-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES COMPARED TO BUDGET (CONTINUED)
• For the Year Ended December 31, 1991
With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 1990
1991
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
Administration:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Capital outlay
Total
Planning and Zoning:
Over
Final (Under)
Budget Actual Budget
$123,400 $113,130 $(10,270)
10,740 9,236 (1,504)
1,930 1,107 (823)
3,500 3,500
139,570 126,973 1( 2,597)
la-)/
FORM F-3
1990
Actual
$118,890
24,763
2,458
146,111
Personal services 84,530 69,415 (15,115) 80,709
Other services and charges 11,920 9,212 (2,708) 21,750
Supplies 7,700 6,467 (1,233) 9,721
Capital outlay 9,500 9,762 262 872
Total 113,650 94,856 1( 8,794) 113,052
Housing Authority:
Personal services (11,680) (20,934) (9,254) (10,594)
Other services and charges 1,140 1,174 34 940.
Supplies 1,500 (1,500)
Capital outlay
• 1,200 1,189 11) 500
Total (7,840) 18 571) 10 731) (9,154)
Total Community Development 245 380 203 258 $(42,122.) $250,009
COMMUNITY SERVICES:
Administration:
Personal services $166,530 $167,846 $ 1,316 $152,421
Other services and charges 68,810 79,001 10,191 65,020
Supplies 8,400 2,831 (5,569) 6,454
Capital outlay 599
Total 243,740 249,678 5,938 224,494
Ice Arena:
Personal services 174,520 178,994 4,474 167,593
Other services and charges 100,800 94,001 (6,799) 103,788
Supplies 27,810 26,647 (1,163) 25,914
Capital outlay 2,000 1,616 384) 2,191
Total 305,130 301,258 (3,872) 299,486
41
-77-
I a- I a CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES COMPARED TO BUDGET (CONTINUED)
•
For the Year Ended December 31, 1991
With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 1990
1991
Over
Final (Under) 1990
Budget Actual Budget Actual
COMMUNITY SERVICES: (Continued)
Swimming Pool:
Personal services $109,600 $105,060 $ (4,540) $ 83,221
Other services and charges 31,550 28,787 (2,763) 23,476
Supplies 27,410 23,167 (4,243) 17,937
Capital outlay 5,050 6,716 1,666 4,218
Total 173,610 163,730 (9,880) 128,852
Community Center:
Personal services 278,810 269,247 (9,563) 313,831
Other services and charges 103,760 97,248 (6,512) 109,823
Supplies 21,650 24,466 2,816 27,184
Total 404,220 390,961 13 259) 450,838
Recreation:
Personal services 254,500 234,710 (19,790) 226,475
Other services and charges 92,310 85,405 (6,905) 91,195
Supplies 38,640 40,483 1,843 33,635
Capital outlay 3,278 3,278 11185
Total 385,450 363,876 2? 1,574) 352,490
Nature Center:
Personal services 232,960 236,892 3,932 238,863
Other services and charges 39,380 37,575 (1,805) 37,289
Supplies 12,430 11,615 815) 11,321
Total 284,770 286,082 1,312 287,473
Forestry:
Personal services 112,050 104,416 (7,634) 111,789
Other services and charges 83,610 97,411 13,801 95,918
Supplies 4,100 5,213 1,113 6,653
Capital outlay 13,000, 13,773 773 11,899
Total 212,760 220,813 8,053 226,259
Lyndale/Nicollet Maintenance:
Personal services 1,960 4,479 2,519 50
Other services and charges 2,500 83 (2,417) 3,307
Supplies 1,150 1,390 240 1,458
Total 5,610 5,952 342 4,815
-78-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
• SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES COMPARED TO BUDGET (CONCLUDED)
For the Year Ended December 31, 1991
With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 1990
COMMUNITY SERVICES: (Continued)
Government Buildings:
Personal services $ 174,420 $ 175,631 $ 1,211 $ 153,703
Other services and.charges 143,690 145,422 1,732 161,856
Supplies 17,540 16,859 681) 17,057
Total 335,650 337,912 2,262 332,616
Park Maintenance:
Personal services 431,010 407,593 (23,417) 439,674
Other services and charges 178,590 180,401 1,811 171,859
Supplies 49,930 47,246 (2,684) 58,227
Capital outlay 13,000 7,932 (5,068) 60,429
Total 672,530 643,172 (29,358) 730,189
Streets:
Personal services 369,420 469,992 100,572 359,865
Other services and charges 624,990 529,740 (95,250) 631,917
• Supplies
Capital outlay 85,150 116,868 31,718 87,967
2,591
Total 1,079,560 1,116,600 37,040 1,082,340
Engineering:
1991
Over
Final (Under) 1990
Budget Actual Budget Actual
le-)--13
FORM F-3
Personal services 61,180 61,211 31 84,883
Other services and charges 57,220 46,424 (10,796) 37,936
Supplies 2,680 1,379 (1,301) 1,472
Capital outlay 950 554 396) 14,117
Total 122,030 109,568 12 462) 138,408
Total Community Services
$ 4,225,060 $ 4,189,602
35 458) $ 4,258,260
Total Expenditures
•
$11,962,310 $11,938,423
$(23,887) $11,840,204
-79-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
. MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 1991 and 1990
ASSETS
Current Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
Accounts receivable
Inventory
Total Current Assets
Property and Equipment:
Land
Buildings
Office equipment
Machinery and equipment
Other improvements
Less accumulated depreciation
Net Property and Equipment
Total Assets
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
Current Liabilities:
Accounts payable
Accrued salaries and employee benefits payable
Due to other governments
Total Current Liabilities
Equity -
Retained earnings:
Reserved for capital improvement
Unreserved
Total Retained Earnings
Total Liabilities and Equity
11
1991
$ 840,887
15,617
367,812
1,224,316
273,188
1,055,366
17,151
263,786
57,706
1,667,197
626,589
1,040,608
$2,264,924
$ 4,818
71,086
66,020
141,924
330,000
1,793,000
2,123,000
$2,264,924
FORM J-5
1990
$ 708,175
13,548
359,774
1,081,497
273,188
1,055,366
18,376
261,350
57,706
1,665,986
563,206
1,102,780
$2,184,277
$ 103,295
71,461
174,756
330,000
1,679,521
2,009,521
$2,184,277
-118-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MJkNNESOTA
• MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND
CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS
For the Years Ended December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991
Sales and Cost of Sales:
Sales
Less cost of sales
Gross Profit
Operating Expenses:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Operating Income
Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses):
Interest income
Commissions
Miscellaneous revenues (expenses)
Total Nonoperating Revenues
Income Before Operating Transfers
Operating Transfers Out:
General Fund
Contributions - Liquor Store Fund
Total Operating Transfers Out
Net Income (Loss)
Retained Earnings - January 1
Retained Earnings - December 31
•
$ 6,559,238
(5,230,929)
1,328,309
554,930
221,844
23,110
64,608
864,492
463,817
72,158
20,992
(15,298)
77,852
541,669
(128,190)
(300,000)
(428,190)
113,479
2,009,521
,1
L2 23,000
la -/S
FORM J-6
1990
$ 6,033,748
(4,829,331)
1,204,417
542,564
241,642
29,075
66.508
879,789
324,628
62,477
17,794
(5,066
75.205
399,833
(123,070)
(300,000)
(423,070)
(23,237)
2,032,758
$ 2,009,521
-119-
7
0
0
I Q-I0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNEOSTA
WATER UTILITY FUND
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 1991 and 1990
ASSETS
Current Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
Accounts receivable -
Service charges:
Billed
Certified to County Auditor
Unbilled services
Inventory
Total Current Assets
Long-term Assets -
Advance - Data Processing
Property and Equipment:
Land
Buildings
Office equipment
Machinery and equipment
Other improvements
Less accumulated depreciation
Net Property and Equipment
Total Assets
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
Current Liabilities:
Accounts payable
Contracts payable
Accrued salaries and employee benefits payable
Due to other funds
Due to other governments
Total Current Liabilities
Equity -
Contributed capital:
Property owners
Special assessments
City aid for construction
Federal grant
Total Contributed Capital
Retained Earnings -
Unreserved
Total Equity
Total Liabilities and Equity
1991
$ 2,998,592
296,746
173.550
158,436
9.049
3,636,373
64,000
44,500
1,862,943
13,536
3,005,233
6,466,508
11,392,720
4,786,578
6,606,142
$10,306,515
$ 41,880
27,562
50,594
20,000
1.199
141,235
533,584
3,196,500
2,140,118
30.000
5,900,202
4,265,078
10,165,280
$10,306,515
FORM J-7
.1990
$ 2,608,971
297,673
133,450
148,837
12.532
3,201,463
96,000
44,500
1,860,643
10,144
2,828,009
6,466,508
11,209,804
4,477,753
6,732,051
$10,029,514
38,476
59,084
20,000
117,560
533,584
3,196,500
2,140,118
30,000
5,900,202
4,011,752
9,911,954
$10,029,514
-120-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• WATER UTILITY FUND
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND
CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS
For the Years Ended December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991
Sales:
/047
FORM J-8
1990
Sales and user fees $1,506,573 $1,444,406
Water availability 1,353 1,295
Customer services 12,844 12,178
Sales of material and supplies 5,653 1,128
Certification fee 3,900 4,824
Penalty charge 20,342 16,140
Customer service charge 74,091 74,356
Total Sales 1,624,756 1,554,327
Operating Expenses:
Personal services 582,535 586,688
Other services and charges 452,816 523,076
Supplies 183,482 173,185
Depreciation 308,825 309,644
Total Operating Expenses 1,527,658 1,592,593
• Operating Income (Loss) 97,098 (38,266)
Nonoperating Revenues -
Interest 214,261 214,368
Income Before Operating Transfers 311,359 176,102
Operating Transfers (Out) -
Debt Service Fund (20,000) (20,000)
Total Operating Transfers Out (20,000) (20,000)
Net Income 291,359 156,102
Retained Earnings - January 1 4,011,752 4,039,800
Equity Transfer to Capital Projects Fund (38,033) (184,150)
Retained Earnings - December 31 $4,265,078 $4,011,752
•
-121-
I C;k-1 8 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
0
FORM J-9
WATER UTILITY FUND
COMPARATIVE SCHEDULE OF OPERATING EXPENSES
For the Years Ended December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991
Treatment and Distribution -
Personal Services:
Salaries
Interdepartmental labor
Retirement contributions
Health and life insurance contributions
Total Personal Services
Other Services and Charges:
Rents and leases
Advertising and publications
Maintenance and repairs
Professional services
Communications
Travel and subsistence
Subscriptions and memberships
Utilities
Insurance, bonds, and permits
Other contractual services
Total Other Services and Charges
Supplies:
Office
Clothing
Parts, tools, and
Chemicals
Total Supplies
Depreciation
Total Treatment
supplies
$ 343,322
124,949
41,023
39.107
548,401
28,068
492
69,756
94,093
4,322
3,404
1,437
158,208
64,288
9.897
433,965
1,558
1,897
19,407
155.406
178,268
308,825
1,469,459
1,185
1,228
17,651
147.547
and Distribution
Collection and Billing -
Personal Services:
Salaries
Interdepartmental labor
Retirement contributions
Health and life insurance contributions
Total Personal Services
Other Services and Charges:
Rents and leases
Maintenance and repairs
Professional service
Insurance
Total Services and Charges
Supplies -
Office supplies
Total Collection and Billing
Total Operating Expenses
23,873
5,200
2,879
2.182
34,134
13,869
80
3,842
1.060
18,851
1990
$ 369,531
111,526
40,335
33.606
554,998
28,263
717
184,721
44,760
3,226
6,552
1,288
173,873
66,295
509,695
167,611
309,644
1,541,948
22,375
5,000
2,635
1.680
31,690
9,048
67
3,171
1.095
13,381
5,214 5,574
58,199 50,645
$1,527,658 $1,592,593
-122-
IQ-19
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA FORM J-10
SEWER UTILITY FUND
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
• December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991 1990
ASSETS
Current Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents $1,940,464 $1,965,347
Receivables:
Accounts 104
Service charges -
Unbilled services 159,791 141,226
Due from other governments -
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission:
Interceptor acquisition - current 93,474 89,879
Operating cost adjustment (1990 and 1989) (110,934) (63,819)
Total Current Assets 2,082,899 2,132,633
Long-term Assets -
Due from other governments -
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission:
Operating cost adjustment (1991 and 1990) (80,279) (110,934)
Reserve capacity 13,910 15,578
Interceptor acquisition contract 895,733 989,207
Total Long-term Assets 829,364 893,851
• Property and Equipment:
Land 29,050 29,050
Buildings 527,634 527,634
Office equipment 9,892 6,581
Machinery and equipment 101,548 96,877
Other improvements 65,455 65,455
733,579 725,597
Less accumulated depreciation 429,173 399,415
Net Property and Equipment 304,406 326,182
Total Assets 3,216,669 $3,352,666
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
Current Liabilities:
Accounts payable $ 2,614 $ 424
Accrued salaries and employee benefits payable 31,685 27,497
Total Current Liabilities 34,299 27,921
Equity: -
Contributed capital -
City 131,110 131,110
Retained Earnings -
Unreserved 3,051,260 3,193,635
Total Equity 3,182,370 3,324,745
Total Liabilities and Equity $3,216,669 $3,352,666
-123-
:,Q CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA FORM J-11
SEWER UTILITY FUND
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND
CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS
For the Years Ended December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991 1990
Sales:
Sales and user fees
Reserve capacity charges
Sewer certification charges
Customer service charges
Penalty charge
Total Sales
Operating Expenses:
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission -
Sewer service charges
Personal services
Other services and charges
Supplies
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Operating Income (Loss)
• Nonoperating Revenues -
Interest:
Deferred current value credit
Reserve capacity
Investments
Total Nonoperating Revenues
Income Before Operating Transfers
Operating Transfers Out -
Capital Projects Fund
Total Operating Transfers Out
Net Income (Loss)
Retained Earnings - January 1
Equity Transfers out to Capital Projects Fund
Equity Transfers out to Central Garage Fund
Retained Earnings - December 31
$1,194,523 $1,133,743
6,500 2,400
3,900 4,844
49,167 49,141
13.433 10,659
1,267,523 1,200,787
1,113,520
292,131
77,876
27,614
29,758
1,540,899
(273,376)
1,062,367
297,672
92,831
12,913
29,410
1,495,193
(294,406)
43,163 46,620
4 9
140,867 162,693
184,034 209,322
(89,342) (85,084)
(15,000)
(15,000)
(104,342)
3,193,635
(38,033)
$3,051,260
(85,084)
3,489,972
(184,150)
(27,103)
$3,193,635
-124-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
/Q-al
FORM J-12
SEWER UTILITY FUND
COMPARATIVE SCHEDULE OF OPERATING EXPENSES
• For the Years Ended December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991 1990
Sewer Service Charge - Metropolitan
Waste Control Commission -
Treatment charges $1,113,520 $1,062,367
Maintenance:
Personal Services:
Salaries 155,321 169,428
Interdepartmental labor (credit) 24,992 18,572
Retirement contributions 16,503 19,751
Health and life insurance contributions 55,509 53,284
Other Services and Charges:
Rents and leases 26,758 29,726
Maintenance and repair of equipment 1,123 818
Expert and professional services 8,150 10,918
Communications 2,077 . 850
Travel and subsistence 2,546 3,036
Utility services 5,381 5,279
Insurance, bonds, and permits 16,304 13,908
Other contractual services 3,748 17,596
Supplies -
Parts, tools, and supplies 21,826 7,647
Depreciation 29,758 29,410
•
Total Maintenance 369,996 380,223
Collection and Billing:
Personal Services:
Salaries 28,206 25,781
Interdepartmental labor 5,222 5,093
Retirement contributions 3,053 3,133
Health and life insurance contributions 3,324 2,630
Other Services and Charges:
Rents and leases 6,818 6,665
Maintenance and repair of equipment 45 22
Professional service 3,845 3,168
Travel and subsistence 28 27
Insurance and bonds 1,054 818
Supplies -
Office supplies 5,788 5,266
Total Collection and Billing 57,383 52,603
Total Operating Expenses 1 540 899 $1,495,193
Is
-125-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE FUND
• COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 1991 and 1990
ASSETS
Current Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
Accounts receivable
Inventory
Total Current Assets
Restricted Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
Revenue bond debt service
Accrued interest receivable
Total Restricted Assets
1991 1990
$ 357,150 $ 265,926
822 448
65,513 55,426
423,485 321,800
336,257 327,596
6,706 3,040
342,963 330,636
Property and Equipment:
Land
Buildings
Office equipment
Machinery and equipment
Other improvements
Less accumulated depreciation
Net Property and Equipment
Total Assets
•
57,865 57,865
430,117 429,541
9,677 7,862
304,701 280,716
1,601,819 1,567,619
2,404,179 2,343,603
1,247,158 1,108;151
1,157,021 1,235,452
$1,923,469 $1,887,888
-126-
Ia-a3
FORM J-13
0
1991 1990
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
Current Liabilities (Payable from Current Assets):
Accounts payable $ 5,796 $ 7,960
Contracts payable 980
Accrued salaries and employee benefits payable 26,071 22,383
Due to other governments 71
Total Current Liabilities
(Payable from Current Assets) 32,918 30,343
Current Liabilities (Payable from Restricted Assets):
Accrued interest payable 8,648 9,324
Bonds payable (due in one year) 65,000 65,000
Total Current Liabilities
(Payable from Restricted Assets) 73,648 74,324
Long-term Liabilities -
Bonds payable (due after one year) 730,000 795,000
Total Liabilities 836,566 899,667
Equity:
Contributed capital -
City 579,689 579,689
Retained Earnings:
Reserved for revenue bond retirement 256,312 256,312
Unreserved 250,902 152,220
Total Retained Earnings 507,214 408,532
Total Equity 1,086,903 988,221
Total Liabilities and Equity $1,923,469 $1,887,888
•
-127-
CITY OF RICHFIELD
MINNESOTA FORM J
14
, -
MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE FUND
COMPARATIVE STATEM ENT OF REVENUES,' EXPENSES,
AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS
For the Years Ended December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991 1990
Sales and Cost of Sales:
User fees $1,031,210 $1,006,211
Sales of merchandise and concession 111,008 124,009
Less cost of sales (65,343) (60,706)
Gross Profit 1,076,875 1,069,514
Operating Expenses:
Personal services 553,013 509,827
Other services and charges 191,577 209,036
Supplies 86,873 128,801
Depreciation 143,505 153,293
Total Operating Expenses 974,968 1,000,957
Operating Income 101,907 68,557
Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses):
Interest income 51,537 49,828
Loss on sale of disposed equipment (214) (515)
Miscellaneous 907 7,176
•
Interest expense and fiscal charges (55,455) (59,257)
Total Nonoperating Expenses (3,225) (2,768)
Net Income 98,682 65,789
Retained Earnings - January 1 408,532 342,743
Retained Earnings - December 31 $ 507,214 $ 408,532
U
-128-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE FUND
COMPARATIVE SCHEDULE OF OPERATING EXPENSES
• For the Years Ended December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991
Personal Services:
Salaries $383,480
Interdepartmental labor 117,599
Retirement contributions 34,538
Health and life insurance contributions 17,396
Total Personal Services
Other Services and Charges:
Rents and leases
Rental of land
Advertising and publications
Maintenance and repairs
Professional services
Communications
Travel and subsistence
Subscriptions and memberships
.Utilities
Insurance, bonds, and licenses
Total Other Services and Charges
Supplies:
Office
Parts, tools, and supplies
Total Supplies
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
C7
553,013
86,325
8,219
3,331
15,215
20,525
3,773
4,838
1,739
13,843
33,769
191,577
3,947
82.926
86,873
143,505
974 968
la-Qs-
FORM J-15
1990
$ 356,645
108,303
28,173
16,706
509,827
90,937
32,656
2,920
13,777
6,676
3,811
6,348
2,055
18,690
31,166
209,036
2,248
126,553
128,801
153,293
1,000,957
-129-
0
0
oZ _ (0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE FUND
SCHEDULE OF CHANGES IN ASSETS RESTRICTED
FOR REVENUE BOND DEBT SERVICE
For the Year Ended December 31, 1991
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year
Cash Receipts:
Interest earnings -
Investments
Transfer from operating cash
Total Cash Receipts
Cash Disbursements:
Principal payments
Interest payments
Fiscal agent's fee
Total Cash Disbursements
Cash and investments at end of year
-130-
FORM J-16
Revenue Bond
Debt Service
$327,596
8,661
120,455
129,116
65,000
55,270
185
120,455
336 257
/a- a-7
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA FORM J-17
STORM SEWER UTILITY FUND
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991 1990
ASSETS
Current Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents $ 364,057 $ 546,157
Accounts receivable -
Service charges -
Unbilled services 75,585 74,224
Total Current Assets 439,642 620,381
Restricted Assets -
Cash and cash equivalents for debt service 128,046 128,046
Property and Equipment:
Machinery and equipment 29,733 28,833
Other improvements 2,988,500 2,525,207,
3,018,233 2,554,040
Less accumulated depreciation 362,257 273,725
Net Property and Equipment 2,655,976 2,280,315
Total Assets $3,223,664 $3,028,742
UITY
LIABILITIES AND E
Q
Current Liabilities:
Accounts payable $ 220 $ 267
Contracts payable 26,026
Due to other governments 11,263 11,263
Total Current Liabilities 37,509 11,530
Current Liabilities (Payable from Restricted Assets):
Accrued interest payable 59,572 61,275
Bonds payable (due in one year) 80,000 75,000
Total. Current Liabilities
(Payable from Restricted Assets) 139,572 136,275
Long-term Liabilities -
Bonds payable 2,175,000 2,255,000
Total Liabilities 2,352,081 2,402,805
Equity -
Retained earnings -
Unreserved 871,583 625,937
Total Liabilities and Equity $3,223,664 $3,028,742
.7
-131-
a p CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA FORM J-18
STORM SEWER UTILITY FUND
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES,
• AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS
For the Years Ended December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991 1990
Sales:
Charges for services $ 627,772 $ 566,364
Customer service charges 16,776 16,837
Penalty charge 4,606 3,655
Total Sales 649,154 586,856
Operating Expenses:
Personal services 116,993 139,720
Other services and charges 89,752 73,421.
Supplies 12,010 6,432
Depreciation 88,532 81,921
Total Operating Expenses 307,287 301,494
Operating Income 341,867 285,362
Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses):
Interest income 47,545 46,965
Flood grant 37,500
Interest expense and fiscal charges (143,766) 147 889)
Total Nonoperating Expenses 96 221) 63 424)
Net Income 245,646 221,938
Retained Earnings - January 1 625,937 403,999
Retained Earnings - December 31 871 583 625 937
U
-132
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
STORM SEWER UTILITY FUND
COMPARATIVE SCHEDULE OF OPERATING EXPENSES
For the Years Ended December 31, 1991 and 1990
1991
Personal Services -
Interdepartmental labor
Other Services and Charges:
Rents and leases
Maintenance and repairs
Professional services
Travel and subsistence
Utilities
Insurance
Other contractual services
Total Other Services and Charges
Supplies:
Office
Parts, tools, and supplies
Total Supplies
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
$1164993
49,636
3,345
16,159
1,441
2,216
4,894
12.061
89,752
4,324
7,686
12,010
88,532
307 287
/-Q?
FOa J-19
1990
$139,720
52,516
3,413
9,130
1,693
1,381
4,074
1,214
73,421
3,001
3.431
6,432
81,921
301 494
-133-
30 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA FORM J-20
STORM SEWER UTILITY FUND
SCHEDULE OF CHANGES IN ASSETS RESTRICTED
FOR REVENUE BOND DEBT SERVICE
For the Year Ended December 31, 1991
Revenue Bond
Debt Service
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year $128,046
Cash Receipts -
Transfer from operating cash
Cash Disbursements:
Principal payments
Interest payments
Fiscal agent's fee
Total Cash Disbursements
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year
0
lJ
218,766
75,000
143,313
453
218,766
$128,046
-134-
11
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 90
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Consideration of a request to modify City precinct boundaries.
Background:
At the March 23, 1992 City Council meeting, the Council approved
an ordinance establishing the boundaries of Council ward
districts and a resolution establishing precinct boundaries. The
City submitted the approved redistricting plans by March 30, 1992
as required by statute. The only precinct boundary changes
required by the redistricting process were to the boundaries of
Precinct 2 and Precinct 3 to reflect the new City ward
boundaries. All other precinct lines remained as previously
established. The City Council is given the responsibility to
establish precinct boundaries of the election districts by
Minnesota Statute 204B.14.
On Thursday, April 9, 1992, the City was contacted by Jeff Spartz
of Capital Partnerships, Inc. He has been retained by the
Hennepin County Board to assist in redistricting the County
Commission Districts. Mr. Spartz, on behalf of Commissioner
Johnson, requested that the City Council consider modifying the
boundaries of Precincts 4 and 5 in Richfield to accommodate the
balancing of County Commission District populations. Mr. Spartz
stated that this change would facilitate one county alternative
redistricting plan which proposes. the division of Richfield into
two County Commission Districts. The City is currently located
wholly within County Commission District 2. The proposed
redistricting would place portions of Richfield in District 2 and
the remainder in District 3. According to Mr. Spartz, in order
to implement this redistricting, the City Council is being asked
to modify the boundary of precincts 4 and 5. (Maps attached.)
Recommended Motion:
That the City Council discuss the request by Hennepin County
Commissioner Johnson to modify the City's precinct boundaries.
Basis for Recommendation:
Hennepin County Commissioner Johnson has requested that the City
Council consider this proposal to facilitate the redistricting of
County Commission Districts.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could approve the requested modification to
the City's precinct boundaries to accommodate the Hennepin
County Commissioner redistricting process by passing the
attached resolution.
0 2. The City Council could deny the request to modify the precinct
boundaries for the following reasons:
//--I
• A. Maintaining the existing precinct boundaries where possible
allows voters to continue to vote at their current polling
place. This will cause the least disruption and confusion
for voters.
B. The precinct boundaries established by the City Council on
March 23, 1992 have appeared in the Sun Current newspaper.
An additional change may create confusion for voters.
C. The proposed change would create a large population
differentiation in the precincts:
Precinct 4 would increase from 3813 to 4882; Precinct 5
would decrease from 3912 to 2843. The population size of
the proposed Precinct 4 would create difficulty
accommodating the processing of voters on election day.
The size of the proposed Precinct 4 raises the question
whether it would be prudent to consider splitting it to
create two precincts of a more manageable size. This would
require further analysis to identify a building to serve as
a polling location anbd identify a funding source for the
additional vote tabulator and related equipment (est.
$8,000 - $10,000).
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Hennepin County must complete its redistricting process by April
• 20, 1992. Therefore, the City Council is being asked to respond
to this request at the April 13, 1992 City Council meeting.
Respe ly submitted,
James D Prosser
City nager
JDP:ds
0
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 7858 ESTABLISHING
BOUNDARIES OF ELECTION PRECINCTS
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as
follows:
1. The boundaries.of the election.precincts, and polling places
for such election precincts, within the City are hereby amended
and established to be as follows:
Precinct 4A That area of the City lying west of Interstate
Highway 35W between 67th Street and the following described line:
Beginning at the intersection of Xerxes Avenue and 75th
Street; thence east on 75th Street to Humboldt Avenue; thence
north on Humboldt Avenue to 73rd Street; thence east on 73rd
Street to Interstate Highway 35W.
Polling Place: St. Richard's Catholic Church, 7540 Penn Avenue
South
Precinct 5A That area of the City lying west of Interstate
• Highway 35W and south of the following described line:
Beginning at the intersection of Xerxes Avenue and 75th
Street; thence east to Humboldt Avenue; thence north on Humboldt
Avenue to 73rd Street; thence east on 73rd Street to Interstate
Highway 35W.
Polling Place: Richfield Jr. High, 7461 Oliver Avenue South
2. The precinct boundaries shall commence to be effective for the
conduct of the September 15, 1992 Election. Sixty (60) days
notice of the effective date of the precinct boundaries shall be
posted in the office of the city clerk prior to the effective
date of such precinct boundaries.
3. The municipal clerk or county auditor shall notify each
affected registered voter of the change in election precinct
boundaries at least 14 days prior to the first election in which
the new precincts are used.
4. The municipal clerk must prepare maps showing the correct
boundaries of each election precinct in the municipality. The
maps will be deposited 30 days before the state primary with the
county auditor, secretary of state, and state planning director.
A copy of the maps shall also be available for public inspection
in the office of the municipal clerk.
1 ?-3
. 5. For each election held in the municipality the clerk shall
furnish copies of the appropriate precinct maps to the election
judges for each polling place.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23rd
day of March, 1992.
Martin J. Kirsch Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
0
0
//-Y
.7
U
CITY OF RICHFIELD PRECINCTS
APRIL 13, 1992
POPULATION
AS PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL
ON 3./23/92
PRECINCT
1.
2
3
POPULATION
4,013
3,728
4,387
PROPOSED PRECINCT CHANGE
BY HENNEPIN COUNTY
POPULATION
4,013
3,728
4,387
4 3,813 4,882
5 3,912 2,843 ;
6 3,775 3,775
7 4,354 4,354
8 3,922 3,922
9 3,806 3,806
TOTAL 35,710
0
eslswlru ?'\ ? ?
LUl =7CD ? "
sesi - ?L ?JL? \? " V 3
,•" e t ?r , c r s a s c oc ?
eels aa?? r -
! u 1 L ! f 1 e? W
M a? t :s
: . 2 t t =
-bb WIM
Fa ?C ?? r CCC .,.1
vote
else
rtltrrlwolst V 1 k OF
N W ? ••?i1 CM ? 1 I ? i co ?, otswlwm?
C sale
.. •1 ' ? Fo M U
l
918
4
1 11 ?? I C y'i` r C C `J A
0401 11 f I I YG+ f'Q? IGO 11
G«°rp at? I, lets
wwwwwo C CC•? ?i?? ???jl '? rN.}ID
7oM Vrworm
04114
49 dow4lbod Men ''0 ow"W"
lag
as*
wt l _JI?LI ?_' CI :iIIC,.??; ?^^_r=, 'lalarv
-- I i LLI
C\j
trawalt
7-7
MI I ?. l? r
C`_I?? 11? Ir?_ CC I ' NMfAi1i
AV "'n*20
??70W" III l$ I) ly iC Ly_ "? ? ??'?? 7M 1lT7mli
n IM I- V I tlarslr,s
?go' ,? ??w I ? i?_I , (?O??C•? ;
?? 1 S 1? ' LJ Ma?1? lA I u
1iT31 aw ! M .+t _ (? ••le i r _ rlr? e ^ q a,Insirly
-aa It'
arses I?1 A? __'3 c) I??.'i? (-`i LI ??+i11 C, M
Gav
in
am AMONG"
My 71er1Yt ?a?aA
q-lo?
11.71?Ole 'ii '? ? ?? ? ?.,- ^it -,) O awe nsrat
bear! ?}1?=TTT/ • •? C? ??U, ,?,) aeww
...? _?. E: ", = °? ?? 1 CCI ? (::Ao.
1•GW1r ?V111M
srsrls ?..' ?
lwlwel - 'fL?-?? axon"
saws. 1
.
80412 -; I .. • CCC? ?, . awe.
?? ,? CC 'l I En4 tra
seise
Ni s +i •K r,i?--• ?I1D >_ _a ••sres
4"43 01
,
aas amid ?_: •'ar !? L _ ?1 eN wane
rails 1 I U d her OMO - •? • 7A. mass
t77isM1 `II -" I c y). i
ov4swim
svar,ll
low saxu=
Z 7 i 7 J s: r ='
9
7 ANN!
_o
H
Q
a
U
Z
U
w
0
a
zi
M
N
M
Z
0 Q
J
H
U
Z
O O
W
C
CD
o
Li1
F--
z
CL
C)
¦
Lol
Q
t?
Cl)
C)
W
W
Z
-lima
PC
"o
e
.
"IND
W
W
I'•
V
?rL
M V
IL. J` ._. II I i` ?
,1 rt I?} trr( ?. ^.Yi ?
lT?u"Itlw, i .. I -
.1 t1
C i ^^
a,ai w vt ??_,?o ^ , -R ? !? Seas
I II -? ,I
tl JI ?-? ^ II .-
1 .1?.
OMDGQ
e7. e-as J. t ? 1! '?
Ito I__
•. o er- so. IM
t
tG3s , -Rol,
ityl:y ? etc=__
IS r" T).
.4101•_ *--?+_"??;?? ?'' -
:In ant ! ?? L ,? ?•' , '.?;?
rolrln •
y Q,O..P,. IKr=? =
lt1N1 ?
D rnr j ? ?-• L _?-? 7
I
It IF rsa
or 11 M
law as, 1,
wlr
a71r
¦.tatYw q
t.N4 l? 1 qwt
Situ ??-
tormse9ta u
93243K moo
7 T t ! t ?
_ L • t
' V
'? 1M=
I ?
Le
Jl
CD
F .,, u U
u tJ ` LJ
t t Y
?s
* ?
C tI
Z L
O
_
l?
W
.1 tl
O
Lu
L 1
=Zc=I .91 O
t-
I1 Q
LLJ
^- v a C/i
?
I
O
i
?
j : ; •? I I ?
1i
?I ? M OI O
-?i
-
'_' Arrn i
? oaTy,q C U i
W W
=1j wen-W C C
' 4? awti C I-
??
_ _ ".1. -wt
1+ `.{
S looooo i ¦
C\j
low
LLJ
mow CD
1tt I ? • ?r ?? ? ?I l.?.t ? ?
O
? ?(r`''.'???\???1.. li ? 1 •}alt
1-7
` :.. m Ln
II rgtq ?
• ? -? i I ?ll y
_ = J r'Y t taw ?J
?c ^_ ? ? y Q1Dr M ? ` ? ¦
.' I .I = ? ? i fray, M
? `_ r I 17 trt?
? ? '% i ? ,elan U
"ooa boom
:-K Ln
OW -K
•? fir, ° N f 1 . J.1? C
1AT
titan N
t ? a
C
its
ZZ
I
Z
Of
N11
ii
I
<
fV' )
W
Q
C)
Z
0
U
W
W
Z
?o
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
( Council Letter No. 89
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
First reading of an ordinance amending the current swimming pool
ordinance. (Deferred from March 23, 1992.)
Background:
In reviewing the current swimming pool ordinance for changes and
updates, two areas of concern were identified. .
Areas that are not clearly defined within the ordinance are:
? the addition of a section defining the City's health
authority;
? a public swimming pool definition; and
? a section giving the City the authority to charge a license
fee for the inspection of all public swimming pools.
Inspections have been conducted for several years on public
swimming pools yet nothing was in place in the ordinance which
authorized the City to collect a license fee to cover the cost of
those inspections. The Bloomington inspection contract provides
this service, however the City receives no fees.
The license fees for inspecting public swimming pools has been
reflected in Appendix D.
Secondly, several areas were removed from the ordinance
inadvertently when the ordinances were recodified in July 1987.
This primarily affected a portion of the ordinance that dealt
with health and safety issues.
At the City Council meeting of March 23, 1992, a question was
raised regarding the inspection fee. Staff was directed to
determine if apartments with pools are valued for tax purposes
higher than apartments without pools. A copy of the report from
the County Assesor is attached. The report concludes that there
is no significant difference.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends approval of a first reading of ordinance
amendments which update the current swimming pool ordinance.
Basis for Recommendation:
1.' These changes provide a better definition in several areas
and give the City the authority to charge a license fee for
the annual inspections that are conducted through the City of
Bloomington contract.
/0-1
• 2. This updating will also reinstate health and safety portions
of the ordinance that were inadvertently removed in July 1987
when the ordinance was recodified.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not amend the current ordinance which would mean that the
City will be unable to charge a fee for the annual.
inspections that are currently being conducted by the City of
Bloomington.
2. Do not reinstate health and safety issues into the current
ordinance.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
First reading of an ordinance amendment which updates the current
swimming pool ordinance and setting May 11, 1992 as the public
hearing and second reading.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja D. Prosser
Ci Manager
0
JDP:ds
0
/O-2
. CITY OF RICHFIELD
Memorandum
DATE: March 27, 1992
TO: Jim Prosser, City Manager
FROM: Larry A. Miller, Principal Appraiser
SUBJECT: Swimming Pool Values
Enclosed is a copy of a memo prepared by Ray Shudy, Commercial
Appraiser for Hennepin County. Ray has extensive experience in
apartments, including testifying as expert witness in tax court.
His opinion, from the memo, indicates that pools have little or
no effect on value. I agree with this conclusion.
An additional comment I would make is that in Richfield I am not
aware of any apartment complexes that have added pools. There
have been a couple of smaller apartment buildings or complexes
that have removed pools.
• Overall, I would say that pools do not add value to apartments in
the City of Richfield.
LAM: at
cc: Steve Devich
Encl.
0
/0-3
DATE: March 25, 1992
TO: Larry Miller, Principal Appraiser
HENNEPIN FROM: Ray Shudy, Senior Appraiser, Commercial Section
F] SUBJECT: The Effect of Swimming Pools on Apartment Values
Informal studies of apartment sales show that swimming pools, as
an amenity, have a small postive effect on apartment sale prices.
The increased maintenance and insurance costs associated with
the operation of swimming pools limit this positive effect on value.
By themselves, swimming pools have not produced higher rental
rates. They do contribute to reduced tennant turnover during the
spring and summer months.
To fulfull tennant expectations, apartment owners often choose
to rebuild swimming pools that have deteriorated even though the
costs may exceed return through resale or added income. I doubt
that it would be cost effective to add a swimming pool to an
existing complex, particularly in today's depressed market.
9
P
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
7521 Lyndale Avenue South ----- Apt. Building
7601 Knox Avenue South -------- Apt. Building
7501 Logan Avenue South ------- Apt. Building
7413 Penn Avenue South ------,-- Apt. Building
7421 Penn Avenue South -------- Apt. Building
7620 Penn Avenue South -------- Apt. Building
7700 Penn Avenue South -z------ Apt. Building
6400-6444 Queen Avenue South -- Apt. Building
800-820 West 65th Street ------ Apt. Building
920 Rae Drive ----------------- Apt. Building
1700 West 76th Street --------- Apt. Building
70 West 78th Street ----------- Apt. Building
1100 West 78th Street --------- Apt. Building
7730 4th Avenue South --------- Apt. Building
7700 Bloomington Avenue South - Apt. Building
6733-45 Cedar Avenue South ---- Apt. Building
7544 Cedar Avenue South ------- Apt. Building
7644 Cedar Avenue South ------- Apt. Building
512 East 73rd Street ---------- Apt. Building
1524 East 77th,Street --------- Apt. Building
1600 East 77th Street --------- Apt. Building
626 East 78th Street ---------- Apt. Building
900 East 78th Street ---------- Apt. Building
1000 East 78th Street --------- Apt. Building
1300 East 78th Street --------- Apt. Building
7721 Emerson Avenue South ----- Apt. Building
7437 Lyndale Avenue South ----- Apt. Building
7700 12th Avenue South -------- Apt. Building
7020 12th Avenue South -------- Intermediate School
7461 Oliver Avenue South ------ West Junior High School
100 West 66th Street ---------- U.S. Swim & Fitness
630 East 66th Street ---------- Municipal Pool
7745 Lyndale Avenue South ----- Hampton Inn
i
Richfield City Code
11
Sentinn 420 - Pr ?*A*e sSwimming pools.
10-5
420.01
420.01. Definitions. Subdivision 1. For purposes of this
section, the terms defined in this subsection have the meanings
given them.
Subd. 2. "Swimming pool" means-a-eexstrueted-Seel--used-f'er
swimming-er-batkixg- any si-ructurej, basin, chamber, or tank
coni-ai ni ng an ari-i fi ni a1 body of water for swi mmi n c s di y_ or
recrt-ai-innal bathing, over 24 inches in depth, or with a surface
area exceeding 150 square feet: tke-tet does-xet-ineit?de-pt?blie
e?-se?igt?l?iie-s?aimmixg-geeis-?egt?iated-ley-seetiex-48A-
Subd. 3. "Private residential swimming pool" or "swimming
pool" means a constructed pool which is used, or intended to be
used, as a swimming pool in connection with a single family
residence, available only to the family of the householder and
the private guests of the household.
Suhd__ 4 _ "Pohl i c -- Wi mmi nar pool " means and' swi mmi ng pool
other than a n ivato rASidAntial swimmingt Tl, intAndPr7 to hP
n um ArS n persnns or sw mmi nC or bath; nq
operated by any person as defined herein whether hA be owner
lAPRAA_ nneratnr, linPnfiAA, nr cnncAccinnairA rAagrdlASS of
whether _a fAA is charcred for such use
Subd. 4a. "Director" means the director of public safety.
Subd. Si. "Construction" includes alteration, addition to,
improvement or remodeling.
420.03. ronstruntion permits Before work is commenced on the
construction, of a swimming pool, three sets of identical plans
and specifications and pertinent explanatory data shall be
submitted to the director for approval relative to design,
operation and maintenance insofar as health and safety features
are concerned in accordance with this section, as evidenced by a
suitable endorsement upon such plans and specifications.
Approval by the building off:;vial shall not pertain to design for
structural stability. The building official shall not issue a
permit for a swimming pool until the plans and specifications
therefor have been endorsed by the director.
420.05. Apnlicnation• ronto*++? The application for a permit to
construct a swimming pool shall be submitted in such forms and be
supported with such information and data, as well as plans,
10-(0
specifications and pertinent explanatory data as required by the
director.
420.07. Pik Plans, specifications and pertinent explanatory
data required to be submitted in connection with an application
for a permit to construct a swimming pool shall comply with the
following requirements and include the following plans and
information as well as such other data as may be reasonably
required by the director. The plans shall contain at a minimum
the following:
(a) The general layout of the building lot on which the
pool is to be located, distances of the pool from the lot lines,
water supply systems, buried sewer and sewage disposal systems,
utilities (electric, gas, telephone, etc.) or other sources of
contamination within 50 feet of the pool and be drawn to a scale
of not smaller than one-fourth inch equals one foot, thus
indicating all dimensions, including the effective length, width
and depth of the pool deck and similar items;
(b) cross-sectional views of the pool;
(c) a cross-section of scum gutters or skimmers;
(d) pipe diagrams showing material and size of all pipes,
inlets, outlets, make-up water lines, vacuum lines, waste and
• discharge lines, circulation and other piping;
(e) the pool equipment layout, showing filters, their
location, pumps, chlorinators, chemical feeders, flow meter
gauges, sight glass, strainers, hair and lint interceptors, if
one is proposed, the dimensions of filter room, its location,
floor drain, sumps and other pertinent information;
(f) the liquid capacity of the pool;
(g) the kind, number and size of filters, including the
square footage of the filter area in each unit;
(h) rated capacity of the filter in gallons per minute;
(i) the type, kind and description of chlorinator;
(j) the type and range of testing equipment, including
chlorine; and
(k) source of water supply.
420.09. AnDKOVAd nian-R_ Swimming pools, appurtenances, water
supply and drainage system and other features shall be
constructed in conformity with the approved plans. If deviations
from the approved plans are desired a supplementary plan covering
that portion of the work involved shall be filed for approval and
shall conform to the provisions of this section.
10-7
. 420.10_ PprmitR and li_npnSPS_
(h) T,inpnapc _ No 13praon -ghal l nneratA or mai ntai n a rnuhl i r
awi mmi nct pnnl uni pea i-hAy have obi-ai nAd a 1 i rpnea to n__nPratp aurh
X)nnl from the ,i nenPi n S ..ti nn _ Su .h 1 i npP ahal 1 hp i paced nn
an annual ha--is and ehal 1 hp AffAntivp from 7anuary I St
throl?cYh
DP-apmhpr nlst of Parh year- Thn fAe for a lin.nap of a awimmin-
ponl J R pAt by appendix 420.11.--PPym}t- eAa---The-fee-€er-a-permit-fer-the-eenstruetieR
of-a-swimming-peel-is-set-by-appendix-H- RlAntrir_al
RA =ui rpmpnta _
(h) No nurrAnt narryincj AlArtriral rnndur#nra shall crrn-c;a
rAfii dpnti al Awi mmi na nnol p nyArh ads or be i natal led and remind
• within fifteen (15) fpAt of aunh n
n nip, nrnvidPd that thA fi_ftAAn
(15) fnnt PAp Arafi nn ehal l nni- annl V to wi ri nq to = nnl 1 i ghti ncr
or arr_AacnripA_
fnl All metal fPnnPa? pnnln-qurAa_ nr railincl-q near nr
adi ar_Ant to rpai dpnti al awi mmi nq n= cal p whi rh mi ciht heemmp
elpni-rirally alivp ap a rppult of ronta t with hrokAn overhead
nnnduni-nrc? nr frnm any ni-hpr rauapy shall hP Pffectiya y
Rrcnundpd _
(d) Liahtinc; for the pnnl shall hP dirprtAd tnward the pool
and not toward adianpnt prn?prty
420.12_ Lonatinn_ No portion of a Rwimmmina ponl or
ap_nliri-enannp4 thArptn shall h R l nratPd at a di titan l Aga than
ten (10) f_At from any aide nr rear ro arty line nor in front
of thA hui1dinq 1inA_
420.13. Heaterp_ Gas fired swimming pool heaters and swimming
pool boilers shall bear the American gas association seal of
approval. Oil burning equipment shall bear the underwriters'
seal of approval.
420.15. water supply_ Water supplies serving swimming pools
shall be of a safe sanitary quality or otherwise acceptable to
the director. The installation of the pool water supply piping
and connection to the source of the supply shall be under the
supervision of a licensed plumber.
10-9
• 420.17. All pool piping and the installation and
construction of the pool piping system shall be in accordance
with the approved plans. The entire pool piping system shall be
tested with an air test of 50 psi and proved tight before
covering or concealing.
420.19. C`.heminal trPatmPnt_ Gaseous chlorination systems may
not be used as a disinfection method of pool water. Residential
swimming pools should meet the following standards:
(a) Free nhlnr;ne_ The free chlorine content should be
maintained between five-tenths (0.5) and one (1.0) parts per
million. (High-free residual chlorine may be used.)
(b) Alkali n;ty_ The pH level of between seven and one-
tenth (7.1) and seven and eight-tenths (7.8) should be
maintained. (A higher pH is permitted if high-free residual
chlorination is used.)
(c) Banter;ainairal quality_ A sample of swimming pool
water shall be considered satisfactory when the total bacteria
count at 35 degrees centigrade does not exceed 200 colonies per
milliliter and no organism of the E. soli group are present in a
10 milliliter portion or 100 milliliter portion as determined by
the membrane filter method. If more than one such sample out of
seven collected on different dates is unsatisfactory, the
bacterial quality of the pool water will be considered
unsatisfactory. Procedures and interpretations relating to
bacteriological quality shall be done in accordance with the
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water, sewage and
Industrial Waste, 11th Edition (1960).
(h) Nn nersnn nwni na nr nz Arati na an outdonr aw; mmi na nnnl
Shal 1 uPP? n Prate. nr al 1 nw t-hp imp of scamh awi mmi nc_l nnnl unl PGsq
such pool rnmpl i Pa with th; s gprt; nn
/0-9
420.21. HA P* ? a?APari* ama- Health and safety_ stlbelivisiex-17
sHAAVV4- ??---A-skilled-swimmer-shall-be-present-at-all-times
sw??m#?g-peed-#s-#?-tlse-
8t?bel--8---.??- H?A?AA?---A-s?a?mm?ag-peed-sl?a? ?-be-egtii??ed-with
®ae-ems-mere-tl;?ew#r'ig-rag-bneys-set-mere-tl?eA-? 5-.?nekes-#?
d?amete?-asel-1gaTa?ag-69-feet-of-3-? f 8-?6-?aek-ma???a-?ir?e
attaekeel--aael-eae-e?-t?e?e-?#gkt-bttt-st?er?g-gees-w?tk-b?tisteel
eaels-a?el-set-less-tkaA-&2-£eet-is-leagtk-£e?-mak??g-?eaek-ass#sts
e?-?eseties-
(r.) F.yary swimming nnnl shall hA under the gupervisinn of
A_ nanahl e i ndi vi dual who shall Assume the resp onsi hi 1 i ty fnr
nnmpl i Anna with All = Arta of th; a semi nn rAl Ati na to Dool
operation and maintonannA and safet3Z of hathers
( d ) When i-ha Rwi mm; nq pool J-- not n= an fnr use, anCess to
the pool- shall he nrevantori
(A) Nnt morn than the maximum design bather load shall he
permitted in the swimmina pnnl at An3Z nne Lima
42Q-22- Tnsnenti nn _
The Health Authority is authnri ed to nnndunt inspertinns of
nuhlin ewimminq pnnls as ;t deems nenessar3I to insure rmm?l;anrP
with all nrnvieianA of this nrdinannp and shall have rJaht of
entry at any rpasnnahla hour to the swimmin lpnnl for this
iIrJ)nsa _
420.23. Other desiyclT anti egtunment A swimming'pool, the design
and equipment of which incorporate features other than those set
forth in this section, shall be subject to review and approval of
the director in accordance with acceptable standards and in
conformance with current public health and safety practices.
420.24_ 0neratinn_
( a ) The pumps, fi 1 tern di s; nfertant and rhemi ral feeders
0 and related an?p,, urtenanneg shall he kept in nperati nn at all .i mP-,
Ib-!o
the ewim_ming =nol ig 'n uae and for aurh additinnal I)P-rin
as
nPAded to kp-Ap tha pnnl water rl Par and of aati efactorv hantPri a1
atia1 ii-y_ Conti numis nr)erati nn of the reri rr»1 afi nn ayatem ahal 1
hA maintained in awimmi n nn?a having a ran?a_ni tV of 200? OOn
gallnnc nr morA during eeaanna of rAqular ua.
•
0
9
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 88
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Request for approval of a subdivision waiver at 7701-05 Morgan
Avenue.
Background:
Leaseback Properties Limited Partnership is requesting a
subdivision waiver in order to divide 7701-05 Morgan Avenue into
two separate lots with a commercial building on each lot. The
7705 building would be sold for use by a vending company and
Leaseback Properties would retain ownership of the 7701
building, which is currently used by a printing company.
The parcel is properly zoned C-2 and the parking will accommodate
the uses. No physical changes will be made except to meet the
noted stipulations. Variances have been granted allowing the lot
configuration.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution approving a subdivision waiver at
7701-05 Morgan Avenue with the following stipulations:
1. That it be demonstrated by the applicant that real estate
taxes due and payable have been fully paid.
• 2. That the subdivision waiver herein granted will be subject to
the easement for street purposes running in favor of the City
of Richfield and recorded as Document 603584 in the Office of
the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County.
3. That a new apron pursuant to Richfield's standards be
installed on Parcel B along the Morgan Avenue entrance, which
ties into the existing curbing.
4. That the parking area be screened pursuant to Richfield's
landscape requirements.
5. That a cash escrow be submitted for all required
improvements.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Approval of the subdivision waiver will not interfere with
the purposes of platting regulations of Section 500.05.
2. On February 25, 1992, the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of the division.
3. On March 23, 1992, the Hearing Examiner filed a decision to
grant variances relating to lot area, lot width, and setback.
• A copy of this decision is attached.
9-/
• 4. The subdivision waiver would allow separate ownership of the
two buildings.
5. The required improvements would comply with City
engineering and landscape standards.
Alternative Recommendation:
The City Council may deny this subdivision waiver if a finding of
fact determines that this proposal would have an adverse impact
on adjacent properties.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A public hearing is scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on Monday, April 13,
1992. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers of
Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue. Notice of the hearing
was mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject
property.
y submitted,
James Prosser
City 4n-ager
JDP:ds
0
is
9-2
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBDIVISION WAIVER
(7701-05 MORGAN AVENUE)
WHEREAS, an application has been received which requests
approval of a subdivision waiver for the division of certain
parcels of land generally located at 7701-05 Morgan Avenue,
legally described on Attachment One, attached hereto and hereby
made a part hereof (hereafter the subject property); and
WHEREAS, the proposed division of land for which the
subdivision waiver is sought is as legally described on
Attachment Two, attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof;
and
WHEREAS, the request was duly considered by the Planning
Commission and the recommendation of the Planning Commission has
been presented to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for
approval of the subdivision waiver; and
WHEREAS, variances for the lots resulting from the proposed
division have been granted by the Hearing Examiner; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds that compliance with City Code
• Section 500.05, Subd. 1 would result in unnecessary hardship and
that failure to comply therewith will not interfere with the
purposes of the platting regulations of Section 500.05.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. A waiver for the subdivision of property legally described
on Attachment One is hereby approved subject to the
following conditions.
a. All future transfer of any of the property described
in Attachment One shall be by parcel or parcels
described in Attachment Two.
b. The applicant shall demonstrate that real estate taxes
due and payable have been fully paid. '
c. The subdivision waiver herein granted will be subject to
the easement for street purposes running in favor of the
City of Richfield and recorded as Document 603584 in the
Office of Registrar of Titles.
d. A new curb cut apron pursuant to Richfield's standards be
installed on Parcel B along Morgan Avenue, which ties
into the existing curbing.
9-3
• e. The parking area be screened pursuant to Richfield's
landscape requirements.
f. A cash escrow be submitted for all required improvements.
2. Upon compliance with such conditions, city staff is
authorized and directed to take any action necessary to
effectuate this resolution and to authorize the recording
,of conveyances complying with the request of this
resolution.
Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of April, 1992.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
0 Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
9-y
•
U
ATTACHMENT ONE
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The southerly 100 feet of the northerly 160 feet of
Registered Land Survey No. 800, Files of Registrar
County of Hennepin, as measured along the East and
Tact M.
Tract M,
of Titles,
West lines of
Q-5
ATTACHMENT TWO
•
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
PARCEL A:
That part of the Southerly 52.70 feet of the Northerly 112.7 feet
of Tract M, Registered Land Survey No. 800 as measured along.the
east and west lines of said Tract M, Files of the Registrar of
Titles, County of Hennepin, lying west of the Easterly 20.00 feet
thereof.
PARCEL B:
The Southerly 47.30 feet of the Northerly 160.00 feet of Tract M,
Registered Land Survey No. 800 as measured along the east and
west lines of said Tract M and the East 20.00 feet of the
Southerly 52.70 feet of the Northerly 112.7 feet of said Tract M
as measured along the east and west lines of said Tract M, Files
of the Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin.
0
W
0
I NORTN L111C TRACT M RLS NO $00-
-M
1
O
?
o'
?$ s TTth ST ss
»E ? 1
??yMINO?Z 1 E°op
N i!• ?s ae' a?
s
CFJ ,, nsn - Aw,
---.- -----
o ? SMAD
W L 4364 1 027
Id° SmRr BLDG a
rl 2O
90 P
(? w
3 "' T7q/ MOR6AN AVE on
Q N tl -
= O
O
O ti a y`b?
70.2
n
? N 2
__?_.
?
^
,
fM
C
O
C1
c yt L. 0P
oods
W
0%0 It
30
Z p?
N \A %XVVx-NA to
z f !47
t.?..
V w ? ° B /STORY BLDG
?? ~ O
W ? paaoE? f •': ?, a q'
7703 MIDROAN AVE. E
N EEEE
W ? ?
?
Ot N
047
\ 1 49.61 - '
90
3110 NS9*46'35"JE - , 19,3.92 -rig
•
p? ..? li 3. !Z fr
J ?
QUTmdIl'VIlQIl®1M 7701 - 05 Morgan Ave.
Division of parcel into two separate
lots. The division will facilitate the
sale of the 7705 (south) building.
PLANNING
N ZONING
Parft"
J
9--7
6700 Portland Avenue- Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2599
City Manager Mayor Council
James D. Prosser Martin Kirsch William Bullock Michael Sandahl
Variance Requegt Ludeman Kristal Stokes
CASE NO.
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY LOCATION:
HEARING EXAMINER:
HEARING DATE:
APPEARANCES:
92-V-1
Leaseback Properties Limited Partnership
7701-05 Morgan Avenue South
Connie Murray
March 17, 1992
J. Michael Thornton and Pat Bilich of Sage
Company; Jon Lonneman, 7308 Knox Avenue
Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, the undersigned
makes the following findings of fact, conclusions, and decisions.
A. FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. Notice of public hearing was proper. Notice was
published in the Sun-Current and mailed to property
owners within 350 feet of the site as required by
City Ordinance. The ten day notice requirement was
also met.
2. The street address and legal description of the property
in question are as follows: 7701 and 7705 Morgan Avenue,
South; The north 160 feet of Tract M excluding streets,
Registered Land Survey No. 0800.
3. The zoning of the site in question is C-2, general
commercial.
4. The following variances are requested:
Parcel A
1) a lot area of 6,151 square feet, where 8,000 square
feet is the minimum required lot area.
2) a lot width of 52.7 feet, where 75 feet is the
minimum lot width requirement.
3) a street side yard setback of zero feet, where
the minimum requirement is 40 feet.
4) a rear yard setback of zero feet, where the minimum
requirement is 19.2 feet.
Parcel B
1) a lot area of 7,240 square feet, where 8,000 square
feet is the minimum required lot area.
2) a lot width of 47.3 feet, where 75 feet is the
minimum lot width requirement.
The Urban Hometown
Telephone (612) 861-9700
Fax 861-9749
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Q-S
M 3) a rear yard setback of 5.4 feet, where the minimum
requirement is 21.5 feet.
5. The variances, in conjunction with subdivision approval,
would allow separate ownership of the two buildings.
B. DETERMINATIONS:
Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, subdivision 6, provides
for the granting of variance to the literal.provisions of the
zoning regulations in instances where their strict
enforcement would cause undue hardship to the owners of the
property under consideration. In determining whether to
grant or deny the requested variance,-I specifically make the
following conclusions:
1. Would strict enforcement of the literal provisions of the
ordinance cause undue hardship, because the property could
not be reasonably used under the conditions of the official
controls?
I conclude: There is an undue hardship. Without the
variances, the property could not be subdivided and the two
buildings could not have separate ownership.
2. Are there unique circumstances or unusual conditions
affecting the property or building which are not created by
the land owner?
I conclude: There are unique circumstances related to the
property. Two principle buildings occupy one lot, which is
nonconforming to present City Codes.
3. Will the granting of the variance alter the essential
character of the neighborhood or locality?
I conclude: There would be no adverse impacts on the
neighborhood. The property has been in the existing
condition for several years. There would be no physical
changes to the property, except for those improvements
required by the City.
4. Are there any stipulations which must be attached to the
granting of the variance to ensure compliance and to protect
adjacent properties? (If yes, specify stipulations under
Item C "DECISION" on the next page).
I conclude: Yes
9
C. DECISION
Based upon the foregoing, the undersigned determines that the
request be
Stipulations:
1. That a new apron pursuant to Richfield's standards be installed along
Morgan Avenue, which ties into the existing curbing.
2. That the parking area be screened per the landscape-requirements.
3. That a cash escrow be provided for all required improvements.
4. That the City Council grant approval of the request to subdivide this
property.
5. That the applicant provide the City with evidence of clear title.
•
D. APPEALS
Any party not in agreement with the decision of the Hearing
Examiner may appeal the decision by delivering to the
Community Development Director a notice of appeal within ten
days of the date the decision is filed. The appeal shall be
to the board of adjustments and appeals.
Byron Waliace
Community Development Director
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, MN 55423
(612) 861-9760
DATED : `%Q•c.?'?, a 3? / ?j?j
U
Hearing Exami er
City of Richfield
8
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 87
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Public hearing and second reading of ordinance for the sale of
property at 6501 15th Avenue to the HRA, and authorization to
enter into a license agreement with the HRA.
Background:
At the March 9, 1992 meeting, the City Council authorized the
acquisition of 6501 15th Avenue and held the first reading of an
ordinance authorizing sale of the property to the HRA.
The City will use federal CDBG funds to acquire the property.
Upon sale to the HRA, the property would be developed by the Vo-
Tech under the New Home Program. New HUD rules require that the
City purchase the property and subsequently transfer it to the
HRA, to re-sell at the appropriate time.
It is anticipated that the City will acquire the property in
April 1992. Following acquisition, the City and HRA would enter
into a purchase agreement for $1.00. The purchase agreement
would be contingent on publication of the transitory ordinance.
Sale of the property to the HRA could occur May 26, 1992 if the
transitory ordinance is approved at the April 13, 1992 meeting.
• The HRA would be responsible for any holding or maintenance cost
incurred at the property after acquisition by the City. A
license agreement between the City and HRA would be entered into
to allow the HRA to complete site preparation prior to the
transfer of the property to the HRA. Site preparation work will
include demolition of the existing structure, environmental
evaluation and survey work.
The redevelopment of the 15th Avenue site is consistent with new
housing activity occurring in the area under the Richfield
Rediscovered program. Within a four block radius of the 15th
Avenue site, three new homes have been completed and one
additional home is nearing construction start.
Staff, in cooperation with Vo-Tech architectural drafting
faculty, has developed project plans to meet all setback
requirements, compliment the design of neighboring homes and
incorporate interior features desirable in today's market. The
new house will have approximately 1,523 square feet of finished
living area. It will feature a split entry design with a living
room, dining area, kitchen, four finished bedrooms, two full
bathrooms, and a deck area. Space in the lower level is provided
for a laundry area and future family room.
Staff has reviewed the storm water drainage situation in the
. neighborhood. Development of a single-family home on this site
will not adversely affect storm water control in this area.
8-I
• Recommended Motion:
It is recommended that the City Council take the.following
'actions regarding 6501 15th Avenue:
1. Hold the public hearing and approve second reading of
the transitory ordinance.
2. Enter into a license agreement with the HRA to allow
completion of site preparation prior to transfer of the
property to the HRA.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The HRA has identified this property for a new home project
and authorized staff to acquire the property.
2. The City Council has authorized the acquisition of 6501
15th Avenue and sale of the property to the HRA.
3. The HRA has approved a development contract with Vo-Tech
pending publication of the transitory ordinance.
4. A finding has been made by the Planning Commission that
acquisition and disposition of the property is in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
5. City owned property requires the adoption of a transitory
. ordinance to effectuate a sale.
6. Construction of a new home will not have an adverse input
on storm water control in this area.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not give second reading of transitory ordinance.
2. The City can choose not to enter into a license agreement
with the HRA for site preparation.
These actions would negatively impact the proposed development of
the site.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Timely sale of the property from the City to the HRA requires
publication of a transitory ordinance following the April 13,
1992 meeting.
Res ully submitted,
James Prosser
City nager
is JDP:ds
7-2...
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE, TRANSFER OR
OTHER DISPOSITION AND CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN CITY OWNED REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN,
STATE OF MINNESOTA (6501 15th AVENUE SOUTH)
The City of Richfield Does Ordain:
Section 1.
The following described real property located in the City of
Richfield, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, is hereby
authorized to be sold, transferred or otherwise disposed of, and
conveyed by the City as herein provided:
.Lot 24, Block 5, "Nokomis Gardens Rearrangement of
Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 "Girard Parkview Addition",
Hennepin County, Minnesota, and having the street
address of 6501 15th Avenue South, Richfield,
Minnesota.
Section 2.
The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to take all
• action as is required to sell, transfer, or otherwise dispose of
and convey the real property described in the foregoing Section
1, including, by way of illustration and'not limitation, the
execution of all documents, purchase agreements, deeds of
conveyance, and other instruments connected with such sale,
transfer or disposition and conveyance.
Passed this day of 1992 by the
Richfield City Council.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
homas P. Ferber, City Clerk
U
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 86
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Public hearing and second reading of ordinance amendment to
permit sale of beer and wine coolers by a local nonprofit
organization or the City at a civic or community event at
Augsburg Park, Taft Park and Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield.
Background:
At the March 9, 1992 Council meeting, first reading was given to
an ordinance amendment to allow, by permit, the sale of beer and
wine coolers by a local nonprofit organization or the City at a
civic or community event at Augsburg Park, Taft Park and Veterans
Memorial Park of Richfield. First reading was approved, a public
hearing and second reading was scheduled for Monday, April 13,
1992 and the following concepts were to be incorporated:
1. That the $300 deposit be set as a minimum to reimburse
the City for park cleanup costs.
2. That an evaluation period be provided.
3. That the processing portion of the fee be nonrefundable.
0 4. That no waiver of the fee be allowed.
5. That the permits be approved by the City Council during
a trial 6eriod.
The above items have been incorporated into the proposed
ordinance amendment.
City Council Members have requested that staff gather additional
information regarding the experience of Bloomington with beer in
their parks. Based on discussions with Bloomington Police and
Recreation Departments the following observations are provided:
? Bloomington does issue permits to permit beer in certain parks
for special events. There have been no significant problems as
a result of these permits. Police observe that some
individuals violating the beer restriction when a permit has
not been issued claim that they are confused about the.
restrictions since the City does permit beer in certain
circumstances but not others. As a result, this has created
the need for the Police Reserves to routinely patrol parks and
advise people of restrictions.
? Bloomington also notes that parents at Little League games are
bringing beer to the games.
? Bloomington has received complaints because adult softball
league team members have been observed consuming beer outside
of areas designated for beer drinking.
Recommended Motion:
Upon close of the public hearing for the proposed ordinance
amendment, 1) approve second reading of an amendment to Chapter
VIII of the ordinance code to permit sale and consumption of
alcoholic beverages, specifically wine coolers and beer, when
conditions are met; i.e., sale is by a local nonprofit
organization or the City at a civic or community event at
Augsburg Park, Taft Park or Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield,
and 2) approve the attached. resolution establishing 1992 license,
permit-and. miscellaneous fees pursuant to the provisions of
Appendix D.of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. There has been interest expressed for an opportunity to
provide nonintoxicating malt liquor and wine coolers at
special events held at Augsburg Park, Taft Park or Veterans
Memorial Park of Richfield.
2. The permit system provides the funds to cover the costs
incurred by the City and affords adequate preparation for and
monitoring of the event.
3. A trial period has be established with the City Manager to
prepare an evaluation for the City Council by June 30, 1993.
• 4. Several other communities have similar ordinances and have
not expressed any problems.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not take any action.
2. Do not amend the current ordinance. Deny second reading.
3. Request a change to the proposed ordinance amendment to
better reflect the best interests of the City and the
community. Reschedule the public hearing and second reading.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A public hearing and second reading of the proposed ordinance
amendment is scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on Monday, April 13, 1992.
Notice of the public hearing was published in the Richfield Sun-
Current._ Consideration is requested at this time.
Respe fully submitted,
JamjI. Prosser
Citnager
JDP:ds
Attachments
?-VOL
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING 1992 LICENSE,
PERMIT AND MISCELLANEOUS FEES
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF APPENDIX D
OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota,.as follows:
1. License, permit andmiscellaneous fees required under the
ordinances of the City of Richfield shall be stated in Appendix D
of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield.
2. Nothing shall be deemed to require the City to issue or renew
any license or permit for which the fee has not been paid in a
timely manner.
3. No waiver of the fees hereinstated shall be allowed.
4. Section 9. Liquor and Related License and Permit Fees shall
include the following:
Type of Permit Section
Or License Reguirinc
(4) investigation 840.11 (c) Local nonprofit organization;
•
Fee ancillary to designated civic
or community event at Augsburg
Park, Taft Park or Veterans
Memorial Park of Richfield;
fee not be less than $100.00
(5) Ancillary 840.11 (a) Cash deposit or other acceptable
To civic or security for site cleanup; minimum
Community required $300.00
Events
(b) Permit - local nonprofit $150.00
organization or City
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota,
this 13th day of April, 1992.
Martin J. Kirsch
ATTEST:
Mayor
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
1-3
• BILL NO. 1992-_
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER VIII
OF THE ORDINANCE CODE
OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Chapter VIII of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield entitled
"Streets, Alleys, and Public Grounds" is hereby amended as follows.
840.11. Sale and consumption of beer in narks. Subdivision 1. Definitions.
For purposes of this subsection, terms defined in the subdivision have the
meanings given them.
{-b}u "Beer Alcoholic beverage" means any beverage whieh Is predee'a
whelly or in part frem the brewing ef any grains er malt er Malt Bebstitete
atd containing more than one-half of one percent alcohol by volume.
{e+I_U "Local nonprofit organization" means any entity having community
service, religious, veteran, or charitable or besiness, activities as its
principal purpose, which has its registered office or principal place of
activity within Richfield, and which qualifies in all respects for the
issuance of a license to sell the type of beer alcoholic beverages to be
furnished at the activity or event for which the permit is being sought.
• (c) "Nonintoxicating malt liquor" is malt liquor containing not more
than three point two percent (3.2%) alcohol by weight.
(d) "Wine cooler" is a wine product that contains no more than three
point two percent (3.2%) alcohol by weight.
fa J ee, "Sale" means all means of furnishing alcoholic beverages and
includes but is not limited to the furnishing for money or other
consideration.
requirements:
Sal Sales must be ancillary to a civic or community event as designated
by the City of Richfield.
• (b) Sales must occur at a fixed location, such as a shelter or a tent,
that is clearly defined in the permit application. When issued, a permit
shall be valid only for sales at the fixed location described in the permit
application and for the duration provided for in the permit.
a
Subd. 2. Sale and consumption at ibite1=?a. The sale, possession with
intent to consume, or consumption of beer alcoholic beverages is prohibited in
the public parks of the city, except that to the extent not otherwise
prohibited by law nonintoxicatina malt liquors and wine coolers may be sold in
7-4
• 'c1 Sales are permitted between the hours of 8:00 AM and 10:00 PM onl
(d) A security Plan must be approved by the Public Safety Director.
(e) Bottles or other glass beverage containers are not permitted.
(f) The applicant must furnish the city with evidence of liquor
liability insurance covering the proposed event in an appropriate amount-.
(b) would interfere with other activities previously scheduled at the
park;
(c) would create an unreasonable disturbance for residents of adioining
property; or
•
(a) an indemnity bond holding the city harmless from liability of any
kind and reimbursing the city for any property damage related to the sale; and
(b) a cash deposit or other acceptable security in the minimum amount of
three hundred dollars (S3001 to reimburse the city for park cleanup costs.
• %.;yrllLIgrounds for such c action; - and v upon -W-- -fL
writincr of the cancellation and the such
notification all actions for which the permit was required shall immediately
cease.
(a) would likely cause or create crowd control, traffic, or park
maintenance problems;
(d) would cause or create any other threat to public health, safety, or
welfare.
*?-s
•
appropriate.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this
day of , 1992.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST: .
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
•
U
7-6
U
STATEMENT OF MR. DON CEDERHOLM, 6214 5TH AVENUE
TO RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MARCH 9, 1992
Regarding Proposed Ordinance Amendment to Permit
Sale of Beer in Parks
I am not against taking a drink, but I think there is a time
and place for it and in my opinion it is not in one of our 26
parks. It will be hard to control. What would prevent a person
of legal age to take a beverage back to a table and give it to
someone under age. The next thing you know you will have control
problems. Even our recreation building in Veterans Park has to
have the lights on all night and there are no activities going
on.
I don't believe you could charge enough for a permit to
cover costs of extra police and for clean up after a doings. Its
a losing proposition. The American Legion serves beverages when
we have special events and I believe that covers it.
What would happen if two or three parks would want a permit
to serve beer on the same day or night. That would create real
problems and I doubt if Richfield could handle that.
We can have fun at our parks without serving beer.
Richfield is getting smaller and smaller.
If our City Officials believe they have to sell beer permits
for our parks to raise more revenue it is time to close some of
our parks. Have them surveyed into building lots and sell them
to build more homes to help replace the many homes that we are
losing.
E
1-7
RECEIVED APP 9 01992
Stan & Ann Dzik
6837 Harriet Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423+2342
April 8, 1992
Mayor Martin Kirsch
Richfield, MN
55423
Mayor Kirsch:
Nor wife and I will be unable to attend the council meeting
this Monday because of serious surgery. We would appreciate it
if you would read this letter to the council.
• The only local and beautiful sanctuarys left for "moms" and
"dads" to take their kids on the 4th of July and other holidays
are the parks that are made and supported by our tax dollars.
Let's keep them free from alcohol and the effects of that drug.
Our entire society is fighting a monumental alcohol and drug
problem. We would hope that Richfield would not add to it by
allowing so-called CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS to sell beer and wine coolers.
People don't consume alcoholic drinks just because they like the
taste. There are a lot of drinks that taste better than alcohol.
There is another reason to have an alcoholic drink, and that is to get
high. Just go to a Minneapolis park in the afternoon and early
evening and watch the behavior of those that are having alcoholic
drinks.
Lets have Richfield continue to be a leading community with
beautiful parks and friendly people. It just does not get any
better. But, it can get a lot worse. Please vote against alcohol
of any kind in our beautiful tax supported parks. Thanks.
Cordially,
• Stan & Aran Dzik
April 10, 1992
v .1g6z.
Martin Kirsch, Mayor
• Michael Sandahl, City Council
Ivan Ludeman, City Council
Re: Opposition to Amendment to Allow Alcohol in Parks
1. This amendment gives the wrong message to kids. It tells teens that
the only way to enjoy one's self is with beer. Our society and
advertising' already does an effective job promoting drinking. Augsburg
Park is located right next to Richfield High School.
2. Enforcement. I disagree with the statment that it will give the
City greater control over drinking in the parks. Right now if an
officer sees someone with an alcholic beverage there is no question to
the course of action that should be taken.
3. It gives the "impression" that it is okay to drink alcohol in the
parks at anytime. We already have one house in the neighborhood that is
party central. I hate to think of what Augsburg Park would be like if
lots of people felt it was the place to openly party. Given a possible
cut in law enforcement personnel this amendment does not make sense.
4. The litter.
A. We already have a litter problem at the park with picnickers.
Some of the debris comes with the wind to our yards. You are mistaken
if you think that the litter will stay in the park. It is quite common
for folks to bring their beverage back to the car, chug the rest and
. throw the container onto a yard or in the street. It is my
understanding that the city street cleaners time is being cut back due
to budget problems, why are you proposing more work for them?
B. If the reason that this amendment is being put forth now is due
to the budget crunch, how about this proposal? Sodas and other items
packaged so that when the container is empty it can be returned for a
reward. This could be a straight deposit at purchase or the vendor
could arrange a partnership with local restaurants to give out coupons
good for a free beverage with sandwich purchase when containers are
returned. If it is true that the only reason this proposal was made was
due to the budget problems, please be a little more creative with future
proposals. I don't think I am the only member of the voting public that
has become jaded by the quick fix approaches to budget problems by
elected officials. Remember we are the members of the voting public
that were told that Canterbury Downs would fix our State budget.
Rita Fox \
6927 Wentworth Avenue South
869-0550
E-CE?'?? APR 1 0 1992
NEWS TART BEHAVIORAL COUNSELORS
• April 10, 1992
Mayor Martin Kirsch
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Ave. South
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Mayor Kirsch:
On Monday, April 13 you are being asked to approve or deny a proposed ordinance allowing
alcoholic beverages, i.e. beer and wine, to. be sold at Legion and Augsburg Park during permitted
events. I'd like to offer some information that may affect your decision on this vote.
1. All beverage alcohol alters our mood. If it didn't,. you couldn't give it away.
2. Alcohol is classed as a disinhibiting drug, i.e. it lessens our inhibitions.
3. Alcohol tends to slow the motor responses and deadens our senses.
4. With just two 12-ounce bottles of beer or two 5-ounce glasses of wine in our system, we
are two times more likely to have an accident than if we were sober.
• 5. With just three 12-ounce bottles of beer or three 5-ounce glasses of wine in our system,
we are six times more likely to have an accident than if we were sober.
6. More than 62 people lose their lives every day as a result of DWI related accidents in our
country.
7. More than 36,000 people were arrested for drunk driving offenses in Minnesota in the
past year.
8. I believe that a majority of the people in these permitted events will be operating an
automobile after the event's conclusion.
I hope you understand that if this proposed ordinance passes, it will increase the number of
people driving under the influence of alcohol in our community. I'm sure this is not your
intention.
Res tfully,
Richard P. Holmberg, Direct7-
New Start Counseling Progras
12 West 70th Street
is Richfield, Minnesota 55423
33 Tenth Ave. S. - Suite 100 Hopkins, MN 55343 (612) 939-9035
RECEIVED APR 13 1992-chme?l
Richfield City Council
Richfield City Hall
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, MN 55423
April 13, 1992
Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council,
I moved to Richfield in 1949 as a young child with my parents. I
have lived in this community for all but three (3) years since that date.
It has been interesting and a pride to watch Richfield grow ...and I am
very proud to be a part of this fine community. That is why I am
concerned, and feel I need to express my concerns regarding the proposed
ordinance for serving beer/wine coolers in our parks. Even with the
proposed restrictions.
Although I do not object to people drinking in moderation...I strongly
oppose to drinking in our parks. Some argue this is by permit only, it
will be controlled, other cities do it, etc.
First of all people will ignore the permit process and continue to
drink in our parks anyhow. At least now our police can control it.
Another argument is that the Legion sells beer in their parking lot on
the 4th of July. I consider this irresponsible and that they are looking
at the dollar signs only ...not the safety of our residents.
I see no good coming from the passing of this ordinance. It creates
more litter (because many do not clean up after themselves). Who will
• pay for this clean-up? It means more problems for our police force...
as you cannot control or monitor a person's drinking. Who decides when
someone has had enough? Someone has two (2) beers is that more then
they can handle? After all we all know best how much beer we can handle!
They get into their car and have an accident in which they hurt or kill
themselves... or worse yet they hurt or kill someone else. This is not
something I would be able to live with. We tell our children that drinking
and driving doqv not mix...but by passing this oridinance we are sending
them the message ...it is okay under certain conditions. We can do better
thftn that.
I would hope that the Mayor and the members of our city council
would think very seriously about all the dangers an ordinance like this
cause. Look past the dollar signs.
If people want to drink let them do so in their homes or resturants
or bars ...not our parks! We as a community should set higher standards
for ourselves, the community we live in and the safety of our neighbors,
families and friends.
I hope each member of the city council will vote no to drinking in our
parks. Thank you for reading my concerns as I am unable to attend tonight?s
meeting.
z4z?? ciy?
• Ruthann Clay
A concerned Richfield resident
13 092
L
,J
looo'
f/
00,
e
0
0
00,
IL?; ..?.?,•.e,A?a, ?.
??'rX ?6-- cz? ??n1.C ?c??K2 ? ??
700/ Z67
/oE
•
9
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 85
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Application for•lawful gambling license for St. Richard's Church,
located at 7540 Penn Avenue.
Background:
On March 20, 1992, St. Richard's Church submitted an application
for renewal of their lawful gambling license. The application
requests renewal for their bingo, pulltab and raffle operations.
The applicant is proposing to conduct bingo on Wednesday and
Friday evenings from 7:30 P.M. to 10:30 P.M. and at their annual
festival which will be held in the fall of 1992. The puiltabs
would be conducted in conjunction with the bingo operation..
The Public Safety Department has conducted the required
background investigation and has determined that the applicant
has complied with all requirements. In addition, the gambling
manager, Mary M. Stein, has no known criminal record.
Finally, the applicant is requesting that the $1.00.00
investigation fee be waived.
Richfield City Code 1100.13 requires the Public Safety Department
to review the request for the gambling license and make its
review and recommendation to the City Council.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the Council pass a resolution approving the
gambling activity requested by the applicant in accordance with
Richfield City Code 1100.13, subd. 6.
Staff further recommends that the Council waive the investigation
fee.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with the State Statutes and City
Code pertaining to lawful gambling.
2. The applicant has submitted the request within 60 days of the
renewal of the license.
3. The applicant has demonstrated that the gambling activity
requested is a benefit to the community.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could pass a resolution specifically disapproving
the renewal request, however, staff has determined that there
is no basis for this alternative.
2. The Council could decide to not waive the investigative fee.
(oE-I
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A request to approve of the renewal of St. Richard's lawful
gambling application and a request for waiver of the
investigative fee is submitted for City Council consideration at
this time.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame Prosser
City qMnager
JDP:ds
0
C]
(0 E --z
• RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR
THE CHURCH OF ST. RICHARDS TO CONDUCT LAWFUL GAMBLING
WHEREAS, the Church of St. Richards has submitted an
application for renewal of their lawful gambling license; and
WHEREAS, the application requests renewal for their bingo,
pulltab and raffle operations; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 349.213 provides
authority for review of applications by local authorities; and
WHEREAS, Section 1100.13 of the Richfield City Code provides
for regulation of lawful gambling; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Public Safety has completed an
investigation of the application and finds the application to be
in order;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council,
City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That a lawful gambling license be granted to the Church
• of St. Richards, 7540 Penn Avenue.
2. That the investigation fee be waived.-
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 13th day of April, 1992.
ATTEST
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
6D
. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 84
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Purchase in excess of $5,000 for a point of sale inventory
computerized cash register system and appurtenant equipment,
hardware/software and services for the Municipal Liquor
Operations.
Background:
The current cash register system, purchased in 1981, has become
outdated and often in need of repairs. Recently, parts and
equipment needed for repairs have become very difficult to find
through vendors.
A staff committee, consisting of members from Finance, Data
Processing and Liquor, has conferred with vendors and other
liquor dispensaries to assemble specifications for a point of
sale system, hardware, software, related equipment and services.
The specifications defined a system that would utilize universal
product codes, via scanning, and communicate with Data
Processing's main computer for inventory recording, something
that the current system cannot perform.
An invitation to bid was published in the Richfield Sun and
• announcements were mailed to all 29 vendors who advertised in the
Minneapolis Business to Business Yellow Pages under "Cash
Registers." Eleven vendors requested bidding documents and four
submitted bids. These four, and their total bid amounts are:
Total Register Systems $54,177.00
Dynamic Products Midwest $62,770.00
Metro Cash Register Systems $69,838.15
Retail Data Systems $88,000.00
Staff recommends the proposal submitted by Total Register Systems
(TRS) of Minneapolis, the lowest bidder. The proposal meets or
exceeds all of the specifications required by the City. The
purchase price includes delivery, installation and staff
-training.
Staff recommends two changes to the purchase as proposed by TRS.
First, staff can obtain the same computer printers proposed by
TRS from another vendor at a savings of $450 per store. TRS has
agreed to install and maintain these printers, even though we are
not purchasing the equipment from them. This recommendation
reduces the bid amount by $5,385. Second, staff recommends an
optional cash register upgrade at a cost of $1,350 per store.
This upgrade provides current technology and better performance.
This recommendation adds $4,050 to the bid amount. The
• recommended purchase amount, including these two revisions, is
$52,842.
Council Members should be aware that representatives from Retail
Data Systems, the highest bidder, may be present at the Council
• meeting to voice concerns about the bid award. It is their
position that their system provided certain security features
that Total Register Systems, the successful bidder, did not
provide.
City staff has reviewed this matter and has determined that
adequate security features exist in the recommended bid package
of Total Register Systems.
Recommended Motion:
1. Approve the attached resolution granting a contract for point
of sale and inventory hardware, software and services for the
Municipal Liquor operation as specified in the City's Request
for Proposals dated February 10, 1992, to Total Register
Systems.
2. Authorize the City Manager to purchase the necessary
computer printers from MTI Office Systems of Bloomington,
Minnesota, at a total cost of $4,035.00.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. A point of sale cash register system is a very desirable
method of checkout, virtually essential to a large scale
retail operation such as the Municipal Liquor Operation.
• 2. Total Register Systems adequately met specifications and has
submitted the lowest bid quotation for a point of sale system
and appurtenant equipment and service.
3. There are funds available in the Reserve Retained Earnings
for Capital Improvement.
4. The current register system is fully depreciated, often in
need of repair and replacement of parts, and should be
replaced in the near future.
5. Total Register Systems has installed systems in many area
municipal and private liquor operations.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council may choose not to accept any of the bids and instruct
staff to obtain new quotations. However, staff believes the
quote from TRS is low and other beverage retailers are pleased
with work performed by the company.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Staff requests approval at the April 13, 1992 Council meeting.
ly submitted,
Res e rapq
• James rosser
City erJDP:ds
6b-Z
0 RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR
POINT OF SALE AND INVENTORY HARDWARE, SOFTWARE AND SERVICES
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for a point
of sale and inventory system for the Municipal Liquor Operation,
bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law;
WHEREAS, it appears that Total Register Systems of
Minneapolis, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota:
1. That the proposal dated March 2, 1992, of Total Register
Systems is hereby accepted;
2. That the Mayor an
and directed to enter into
of Minneapolis, Minnesota,
in an amount not to exceed
services included in their
changes:
3 City Manager are hereby authorized
a contract with Total Register Systems
in the name of the City of Richfield
$52,842 for the hardware, software and
proposal, with the following two
a. The City declines to purchase the Canon laser
• printers included in the bid; and
b. The City purchase SIIG 3000 cash register computers
instead of the SIIG 286 cash register computers
recommended in the proposal.
3. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their
bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder, Total
Register Systems of Minneapolis, Minnesota, shall be retained
until a contract has been signed.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 13th day of April, 1992.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
0
40 4D-3
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Bid Opening
March 2, 1992
10:00 A.M.
Point of Sale & Inventory Hardware, Software & Services
Richfield Liquor Stores Cash registers
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the
Administrative Staff was called by Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk,
who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive,
open and read aloud, point of sale and inventory hardware,
software & services, as advertised in the official newspaper on
February 12, 1992.
Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
William Fillmore, Liquor Operations Director
Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative
Sally Morton, Data Processing Manager
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
VENDOR ; BID ; TOTAL ;
; ; SECURITY ;
•
Dynamic Products Midwest ; Cashiers ; $62,770.00 ;
Mpls, MN ; Check
Total Registers Systems ; Cashiers ; $54,177.00 ;
Mpls, MN ; Check
Metro Cash Registers System, Inc. ; Money Order ; $69,838.15 ;
St. Paul, MN
Retail Data Systems ; Cashiers ; $88,000.00 ;
Mpls, MN ; Check ;
The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and
considered at the April 13, 1992 City Council Meeting.
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
bC
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 83
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Approval of the•1992 Labor Agreement with Richfield Police
Supervisory Association.
Background:
City staff has completed negotiations on a Labor Agreement for
the year 1992 with the Richfield Police Supervisory Association,
subject to Council approval. The bargaining unit is represented
by Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS), a statewide police
labor union.
The Richfield Police Supervisory Association represents the
positions of Police Captain, Lieutenant and Sergeant. There are
presently nine employees represented within this unit. The
changes which have been negotiated for the 1992 contract are as
follows:
? A pay adjustment of 2% effective January 1, 1992 and an
additional 1$ adjustment effective July 1, 1992.
? A $20 increase in the City's contribution for dependent health
insurance, for a maximum of $260 per month beginning March 1,
• 1992.
? A $2 monthly increase in the City's contribution for single
dental insurance, for a maximum of $20 per month.
? A $10 per year increase in the clothing allowance to $425 per
employee per year.
? Conversion of sick leave to personal leave, short and long term
disability, and bereavement leave to become effective on
September 2, 1992. The conversion includes a two-year pay-out
of a portion of unused sick leave pursuant to the former
contract language.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt a resolution approving a labor agreement with the Richfield
Police Supervisory Association for the year 1992.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. Wage and benefits settlements are comparable to other City of
Richfield employee groups.
2. The package contains a conversion from the former sick leave
program, bringing the Supervisors in line with Management,
General Services and the Local 49 group with respect to the
personal leave program.
C-- t i
• 3. The union members have voted on the issues and have given
their approval to the "settlement.
4. The settlement proposal appears to be an equitable resolution
.of the contract for both parties.
Alternative Recommendation:
Do not approve the labor agreement requiring further negotiations
and/or arbitration.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
In order to allow the City's accounting personnel to modify
payroll records and enact the new pay grades retroactive to
January 1, 1992 as quickly as possible, it is recommended that
the City Council act on April 13 to adopt the attached resolution
providing for the contract implementation effective January 1,
1992.
Respectfully submitted,
James Prosser
City M ger
•
JDP:ds
n
U
be-z
A RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING LABOR AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
AND THE RICHFIELD POLICE SUPERVISORS BARGAINING UNIT LOCAL 162
FOR THE YEAR 1992
WHEREAS the City Manager and the Richfield Police
Supervisory Bargaining Unit Local 162 have reached a complete
understanding concerning rates of pay, hours and other conditions
of employment for the year 1992; and
WHEREAS the personnel ordinance requires that contracts
between the City and the Exclusive Representative of employees in
an appropriate bargaining unit shall be implemented by Council
resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does
hereby approve the labor agreement between the City of Richfield
and the Richfield Police Supervisory Bargaining Unit for the year
1992 and orders the provisions of the labor agreement to be
implemented upon signature of the labor agreement referenced
herein by representatives of both the Richfield Police
Supervisory Unit and the City of Richfield to be effective
January 1, 1992.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota
this 13th day of April, 1992
Martin J. Kirsch Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ??
Council Letter No. 82
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Council approval of a resolution authorizing withdrawal of
$950,000 from the Franklin U.S. Government Securities Fund.
Background:
In 1985, the City deposited money in the Franklin U.S. -Government
Securities Fund as part of the recurring investment activities.
The fund has been maintained since that time.
In anticipation of the acquisition of the ILN Cloverleaf
Properties for $1,100,000, the Finance Manager would like to
utilize $950,000 of this fund. The expected closing date of the
acquisition is April 15, 1992. In order to withdraw money from
the fund, Franklin U.S. Government Securities requires a
resolution authorizing the Finance Manager to deposit or withdraw
funds. They currently have no such resolution on file.
Attached to this letter is a resolution which authorizes the
Finance Manager to withdraw $950,000 from the Franklin U.S.
Government Securities Fund. This resolution has been prepared in
accordance with the City Charter. There is no penalty for this
withdrawal.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Finance Manager to
• deposit or withdraw money from the Franklin U.S. Government
Securities Fund.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Sufficient funds are available in the Franklin U.S.
Government Securities Fund to finance a portion of the
purchase of the ILN Cloverleaf Properties.
2. By utilizing these funds, the City can avoid selling other
securities prior to their maturity date and potentially
incurring a loss.
3. If it is determined to be financially advantageous to the
City, the fund could be replaced after the City receives the
July 1992 tax settlement.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not approve the resolution.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action on this matter is necessary on April 13, 1992 so funds are
available for the April 15 purchase.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam 4- Prosser
Cit anager
JDP:cak
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING WITHDRAWAL FROM
FRANKLIN U.S. GOVERNMENT SECURITIES FUND
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield
as follows:
BE IT RESOLVED, that the individuals named below are
authorized to open an account in the name of the City of
Richfield with one or more of the Franklin Group of Funds
("Funds") and to deposit such funds in this account as they deem
necessary, that the persons authorized below may endorse checks
and other instruments for deposits in said account and that
checks or drafts withdrawing said funds may be signed by any one
of the persons authorized below.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Funds, its Custodian Bank, Bank of
America, Franklin Administrative Services, Inc. and Franklin
Distributors, Inc. shall be held harmless and fully protected in
relying from time to time upon any certification by the City
Council as to the names of individuals occupying such offices and
in acting in a reliance upon the foregoing resolutions until
actual receipt by them of a certified copy of a resolution of the
City Council modifying or revoking any or all such resolutions.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the undersigned further
certifies that the following individuals occupy the offices
designated.
•
Steven L. Devich, Treasurer
Name/Title Signature
Bridget A. Walstrom, Finance Manager
Name/Title Signature
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this
13th day of April, 1992.
Martin J. Kirsch Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
.7
R
(o
CITY OF-RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 81
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Approval of an agreement with Adventure Golf Services for design
services related to miniature golf at Veterans Memorial Park of
Richfield.
Background:
The adopted 1992 Capital Budget includes a miniature golf course
at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. The project includes
design of a 36 hole course and construction of 18 holes.
Neither state law, nor City practice requires bidding-for
professional design contracts. In accordance with that practice,
City staff invited eight miniature golf design consultants to be
interviewed. Five accepted. Criteria were developed to
determine which designer would best serve the City. That
criteria included cost, design style, experience, flexibility in
dealing with governmental agencies, ability to produce biddable
prints and specifications, availability for consultations, and
timeframe to accomplish the project. Adventure Golf Services of
Traverse City, Michigan, best fit the criteria. They are well
known for miniature golf course design and also own and operate
facilities. Staff received excellent recommendations on design
work by Adventure Golf Services, including their work with the
• Mall of America miniature golf facility, and miniature golf
projects now in place or under construction in New Jersey, New
York, and Wisconsin Dells.
Adventure Golf Services proposes to provide services, including
a) design; b) all services, drawings, detail and documentation
for bidding; and c) provision of a handbook for set up and
maintenance for $29,000. The price range of proposals from other
designers ran from $28,000 to $35,000. Travel costs were
additional in all proposals except for Adventure Golf Services,
which included two trips to Richfield in their fee. Design would
begin upon Council approval. Construction completion is
anticipated to be fall of 1992 with the facility to open to the
public.in about May 1993.
Adventure Golf Services also builds miniature golf courses.. They
will most likely bid on this project; however, they will be
producing specifications which can be bid on by most general
contractors. They designed the courses in Mall of America, but
are not constructing them. They understand they will need to
participate in a sealed bid process to compete for the
opportunity to construct the facility.
Recommended Motion:
Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement between the
City of Richfield and Adventure Golf Services in the amount of
$29,000 for services related to miniature golf at Veterans
Memorial Park of Richfield subject to final review of the
agreement form by the City Attorney.
G-R-I
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Council has indicated a willingness to proceed with the
project in 1992; therefore, timely completion depends on
early preparation.
2. Adventure Golf Services other miniature golf projects have
been successful and within budget. Recommendations were
excellent.
3. The proposed agreement amount is typical for such a project.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Approval is requested at the April 13, 1992 City Council meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja D. Prosser
Ci Manager
U
JDP:ds
(CAz
<Projects>CP884: t
0 DRAFT
DESIGN AGREEMENT FOR MINIATURE GOLF SERVICES
Agreement between Arne T mark, dba Adventure Golf Services (P.O. Box 4058,
Traverse City, Michigan, 49685-4058), hereinafter referred to as CONSULTANT
and the City of Richfield (6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota,
55423), hereinafter referred to as OWNER, to design a 36 hole miniature golf
course, hereinafter referred to as PROJECT, and provide other specified
services as follows:
1. OWNER hereby hires CONSULTANT and CONSULTANT shall provide the services
listed below for OWNER. The parties expressly recognize that the
CONSULTANT is providing a specialized design service based upon past
experience in miniature golf design, and that certain detail construction
drawings identified under Pbase 2, items B. 2, (a) through (i) require
additional services by others to be coordinated by the CONSULTANT.
Phase 1
A. Preliminary design
B. Theme component drawing
C. Design narrative
D. Two one--day visits
• Phase 2
A. The following design sheets are included:
Sheet 1 Base plan
Sheet 2 Grading plan
Sheet 3 Construction. plan
Sheet 4A Hole topography plan
Sheet 4B Hole topography plan
Sheet 5 Drainage plan
Sheet 6 Landscape and lighting plan
Sheet 7 Carpet layout plan
Sheet 8+ Course detail drawings
Architect's sketchbook #1
Architect's summary with list of probably construction
documents and services required
B. The following design and construct-,ion services are included:
1. Budgeting service
2. Cons truction documents by special design services:
(a) Erygineering drawings
(b) Electrical plan
(c) Lighting plan
(d) Irrigation plan
(e) Plumbing
(f) Hydraulics plan
(g) Architect's sketchbook #2
• (h) Special theme and special effects designs
(i) Rocakwork
1oA3
Design Agreement for Miniature Golf Services
Page 2
2. OWNER shall pay CONSULTANT fees and reimburse CONSULTANT for expenses as
follows:
FEE: $29,000
EXPENSES:
A. All out-of-pocket expenses for federal express, telephone, blue prints
and other miscellaneous expenses incurred by CONSULTANT on behalf of
OWNER. Other expenses such as travel, incurred with OWNER approval,
will be reimbursed by OWNER. Two cne-day visits are included in the
base fee.
B. Rates for advance site visits are:
(a) $1,200 for one (a) day trip where CONSULTANT can visit the site
and return to his office in the same day.
(b) $1,000 per day for visits exceeding one day.
TERMS OF PAYMENT:
Payments for services are due upon invoice. Interest of 1.5% per month
will be applied to payments 15 days overdue from date of invoice, and
additional work in process by CONSULTANT will be placed on hold.
3. SURVEY REL)UI ENT
• OWNER agrees to supply CONSULTANT with a topographical survey, prior to
the start of Phase 1 design, unless OWNER chooses to permit CONSULTANT to
start without it. The survey will use a 1" = 10' or 1" = 8' horizontal
scale and with topographical lines every 1' of vertical measurement. For
design planning the survey shall locate all significant on-site buildings,
objects, features, easements, power lines, trees, rock structures, etc.
OWNER shall also locate on the survey building setbacks: location of
utility sources for sewer, water, or probably location of wells or septic
fields: or any other item which may affect course design. The survey must
be accompanied by a written narrative describing any special instructions
regarding the disposition of these items.
Sites where the OWNER or his survey crew suspect quantities of rock or
clay, wetlands or unstable soil conditions, or other unusual surface or
subsurface conditions should have core samples taken or appropriate tests
performed to determine suitability of site for construction, excavation,
and/or use of the existing fill for use in the PROJECT construction. The
results of these tests and locations of conditions must be noted on the
survey by the OWNER.
4. PROJECT TIMING
Phase 1 A, B, C 7 to 15 days
• Phase 1 D periodic
Phase 2 A 10 to 20 days
Phase 2 B-1 14 to 30 days or more for complex projects
Phase 2 B-2 10 to 30 days or more for complex projects
tOR4
Design Agreement for Miniature Golf Services
Page 3
• 4. PROJECT TIMING - continued
Estimated dates of design work to be dome are guidelines only. Additional
time may be required due to incomplete infonmaticn provided by OWNER,
changes resulting in major revisions, delay in payment of fees and
expenses by OWNER, and OWNER sources of professional services not
performisxg in a timely manner. Both parties recognize that time is of the
essence and projects with tight timetables may be completed in less time
with cooperation between OWNER and CONSULTANT. Phase 2 B-2 is subject to
the time required by each of the professional services selected.
5. USE OF PROJECT DESIGN PLANS
The OWNER is authorized to use the course design for one site only, except
that if one or more courses are built from the same design by OWNER, the
OWNER shall pay CONSULTANT fifty percent of Phase 1 and 2 A design fees
from this Agreement, to be paid prior to start of construction of any new
course. If CONSULTANT is contracted for construction of the new courses,
additional design work will be negotiated to adjust for new sites and
changes in design. CONSULTANT retains the rights to use any design
concepts, drawings or photographs of the design in promotional literature,
films, ads, news releases, trade show booths and other marketing efforts
and in other course designs.
6. TERMINATION OF AGMM1T
• OWNER shall have the right to terminate Phase 2 A and B of this agreement,
within ten days follawing the completion of the services provided in Phase
1, upon written notice to CONSULTANT. OWNER shall pay CONSULTANT all
monies due hereunder for work perfarrned through the date of termination.
Upon such payment, neither party shall have any further obligation of the
other.
7. PROJECT BUDGET
OWNER rests to CONSULTANT that the PROJECT's target budget, including
all design and eonstnr tion, shall be provided within fourteen days after
Agreement approval. This budget is exclusive for miniature golf design
and development. Other components on the site such as utilities, parking
lots and driveways, clubhouse, perimeter fen=ng, other amusement and
entertainment devices and similar non-PROJECT items are not included in
this budget. Other items which OWNER wishes to include in the budget must
be specifically itemized in an addendum to this Agreement.
Entered into this day of , 1992.
CONSULTANT: OWNER:
Arne Lundmark dba City of Richfield
Adventure Golf Services
9
Arne Lundnark Martin J. Kirsch Mayor
James D. Prosser. City Manager
4
•
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 80
Agenda April 13, 1992
Issue Statement:
Proclamation designating April 26 as Arbor Day and May as Arbor
Month.
Background:
For many years, Richfield noted Arbor Day and Arbor Month in an
informal manner. The Forestry and Park Divisions coordinated a
tree-planting with the schools and Mayor; and the press usually
noted the occasion with a brief article and/or picture. These
observations of Arbor Day and Arbor Month (along with meeting
other requirements) were sufficient to grant Richfield a "Tree
City, USA" status in 1986, 1987 and 1988.
our urban areas.
In 1989, the National Arbor Day Foundation required a
proclamation for recertification. In 1990 and 1991, the
proclamation, along with proof of an official observance was
required. The Forestry Division worked with the Wood Lake Nature
Center staff to hold an observance, which was covered by the
local cable news people. Again in 1992, an official observance
of Arbor Day is required in order to renew our "Tree City, USA"
status. In addition, many Richfield residents appreciate the
opportunity to teach their children the importance of trees in
Recommended Motion:
Approve an official proclamation by the Mayor, designating April
26, 1992 as Arbor Day and May 1992 as Arbor Month in the City of
Richfield.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Richfield has a tradition of acknowledging Arbor Day and
Arbor Month.
2. The proclamation is necessary to retain "Tree City, USA"
status in 1992.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is scheduled for
Community Services Director
accept the proclamation.
the April 13, 1992 Council meeting.
Don Fondrick will be present to
Res lly submitted,
Jam c Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
!e ?iE t! .? 6a j??
? °' m'?Fo .??3§. ???° rt tides Ida r k
YTJ
+iln
1' t0?pr r?li' `'ii1i?1 ?i'1`31??'?'??i?Pi
'+ o
a)
z a) C
O L a)
Ca
ca U L rj)
a) C N.O
a)(aC
Y
CO)
N cc$ C))Ca
19 0
Z -0 tE a)
L
-
a) ??
? 0
? U •? M 0)
0
_O c ?
m S of
CC U ns 0 -0
Cu
0 >.?
Q? rn
a) 0)
? N ?"OCa)C
;; ; r ? '•rU--- to ?_0 -
>
?-S C0CCO
Cu d
Q O 0) m _
.N .-
U
?m CUO?U)0)
ZQ sZ0 O
HQ ?Na)
Q -C U)
O c
CD D) gyp" a)) c 9
W a m
aN O•?, QU
?LCU a)a)
Z J tn•> OL L
S a) U CO)
a
44
20
4?
C
0 ID
L 0 .S] r-i
cil ? Lo-
O O m .r to
L I
._ C)
'a (D
m = •? O N
cc &" O
N O C 0_
Via) m?
MC. Q- TC:
OO C? Via)
C4- O m 0 0
O c F.. 0 ?
r (D
j O •?-
+_. 0 ?.. O
CL E a) CO N
o ?Z_m
.>Cca)c
mcai (ciQ ca
a)c?a E
0 U c? ca a)- U
w -00 Cu a)=
•0 _-O c - N
L•- ?.? C
o0o.D?caa)2
?c3??i
C 0 0 4-
2 a)CCL•-?m(a
?-?caEE•;oa)
O ?
C0) 2!0(D -3
U++ C- 0 tCa
CC (D 0a)0
.c .0 -9
U a) . 0) 7 C rL+
W++ -. U CO
rr
w a) ;a a) .- W ca
-lam N 0 O
75 •C as :e - O.U U E cu 0)Y
fA
O ?•- 0*' O 0
L a) m Cu
o 0wtchD°:5 301% ton -W
ca
a)
O
N
+-
U-0
a)
r O
Oc
O?
O
U
O
co
o ,0
' O
ac) =
V:te
)
a
a)
a =
0-0
CD a)
0-O
0 C
Cu c
0-U
O a)
0
U_ ?O
S 0
O >
CD N
CL E
O
a) 0
0,
a) a)
L U
CU . 0
a) •L 0
CL *.
0 U)
6- <
a)
tCUON?
0 CU (D
WO
•C O
N U?
.,_. 0 N
z1b0UN
UCQpfa)
ca E
L O O O
c T a)
0O'_ 0)j
0 L_ (D (D Ca
>, oLLO
Un (U :3
?QcacCO
L
0 O (D (D
L - 0)
03
L 0 E N
E
? 0
2 0 N U
4a -C.0 TCC
CU .-
CO O 0 U)
O
oEca>,
Wa)Nm-
>.C 'N U)
?E0c
U,MCU c
Ua)a)cU
0 0) a)
W >"a 0
ma)Cms1
?, _.. ca -
0)
0)
T
Q
O
-C
M